Solar Energy: 1% of total land mass could be used to generate 100% of energy needs by 2050

[^_^ 5,021]

1% of total planetary land mass is actually 575,057 square miles. Alaska's landmass is 571,951 square miles.

So as appealing as this finding sounds to the uninformed, what it's really saying is this: someone has to put aside - entirely dedicate - landmass equal to the entire state of Alaska (our largest state) ... to power the world.

Who will do this? Where? The Sahara desert? Siberia? The American West? Which part of this world is underpopulated enough with enough solar energy to actually make this happen? And who will tell the few people living in these areas that they must move so "the world" can have solar energy?

The political ramifications are huge.

A new report released on the sidelines of the World Future Energy Summit here today, shows that even if all electricity is to be generated through renewable energy (RE) sources, and with solar photovoltaics (PV) alone, it would take up only an insignificant amount of total land area, contrary to common perception.

...

Less than 1% of the total land mass would be required to meet 100% of projected electricity demand in 2050, if generating electricity only with solar PV .

http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?207268/Solar-PV-power-in-harmony-with-nature--new-WWF-report-says-land-requirements-are-insignificant

[decocker 7,198]

isn't going to happen until some rich chap purchases the sun and copyrights its rays.

[^_^ 5,021]

isn't going to happen until some rich chap purchases the sun and copyrights its rays.

All joking aside, i can't help but see in this report hints of the real reasons the Left wants to disarm America. Unarmed people can't protect their property!

[decocker 7,198]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358456003' post='5927932]

All joking aside, i can't help but see in this report hints of the real reasons the Left wants to disarm America. Unarmed people can't protect their property!

doesn't matter, we never had a chance. still waiting on my mail order nuke.

[^_^ 5,021]

still waiting on my mail order nuke.

i don't think scalia would approve.

[SMR 368]

The issue has never been the land. The panels, cabling, protection devices, inverters, optimization devices, and installation are quite expensive. Further, all of these things take significant amounts of energy.

[decocker 7,198]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358456585' post='5927954]

i don't think scalia would approve.

wouldn't it be awesome, if as a planet we could get our sh*t together and pull something like this off. but considering we can't pool our resources and put an end to unnecessary tragedy like mass famine, i'm skeptical.

[^_^ 5,021]

wouldn't it be awesome, if as a planet we could get our sh*t together and pull something like this off. but considering we can't pool our resources and put an end to unnecessary tragedy like mass famine, i'm skeptical.

Ok, who do you nominate to provide 575,000 square miles of land?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The issue has never been the land. The panels, cabling, protection devices, inverters, optimization devices, and installation are quite expensive. Further, all of these things take significant amounts of energy.

Does oil extract and refine itself?

[decocker 7,198]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358457128' post='5927970]

Ok, who do you nominate to provide 575,000 square miles of land?

alaska?

[Caryh 5,206]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358457128' post='5927970]

Ok, who do you nominate to provide 575,000 square miles of land?

I thought you suggested Alaska? Not that many people up there, but I think most have guns. Now if we take those guns away, maybe the wolves and polar bears can take care of the rest. And we wouldn't have to build bridges to nowhere. Oh wait, liberals won't want us taking that land from polar bears and wolves. How about along the border with Mexico? It would have the added plus of cooking anyone trying to cross illegally. We don't really need to power the planet, just the USA. Then a second good long wide strip along the Canadian border.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I thought you suggested Alaska? Not that many people up there, but I think most have guns. Now if we take those guns away, maybe the wolves and polar bears can take care of the rest. And we wouldn't have to build bridges to nowhere. Oh wait, liberals won't want us taking that land from polar bears and wolves. How about along the border with Mexico? It would have the added plus of cooking anyone trying to cross illegally. We don't really need to power the planet, just the USA. Then a second good long wide strip along the Canadian border.

we could just use liberals for firewood...and illegals. that would free up even more land, and more jobs for real americans.

[Robert&Liliya 31]

We use the moon and a ####### load of extension cords.

[chaine1 116]

Alaska's landmass is 571,951 square miles.

I think if the USA relied on Alaska for solar energy in the winter, we'd all be in the dark!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

alaska?

We could have power every minute the sun is shining, except when it is not shining.