|
How is a handful of people eschewing flights and 5-day work weeks going to have any impact on our future temperatures? We can work on renewables, but the main source our renewable power today is hydroelectric and I have read that very little growth in hydroelectric power can be expected because the vast majority of exploitable topology in the USA is already in use for hydroelectric. Its hard to imagine enough wind turbines being built to eliminate oil, coal, and gas very soon. I've probably made a mistake in my calculations so I welcome some help here. Maybe someone can correct this if I'm wrong. total_usa_power_MWH = 3,808,000,000
fraction_non_renewable = 0.78
replacement_needed_MWH = total_usa_power_MWH * fraction_non_renewable
// replacement_needed_MWH == 2,970,240,000
turbine_capacity_factor = 0.32
nameplate_needed_MWH = replacement_needed_MWH / turbine_capacity_factor
// nameplate_needed_MWH = 9,282,000,000
cost_per_nameplate_MWH = 2,000,000
total_cost = nameplate_needed_MWH * cost_per_nameplate_MWH
// total_cost == 1.86e+16
cost_trillions = 18,600
The annual GDP of the USA is around 20 trillion dollars while replacing our non_renewable_power will cost 900 years worth of our total GDP. Is this right?Even if we pursue this course of action will it affect global temperatures. Other countries will continue to emit GHGs. |
If it is megawatts hours, it should be MWh (lower h), and over which period of time, day, month, year?
If it is megawatts, it should be MW, not MWh.