Thank you so much to everyone supporting us on Patreon! You are helping amplify the voices of scientists working towards a more sustainable future. If you'd like to learn more about how to get involved, check out our Patreon page: bit.ly/2BRTjYU
TED-Ed Have you ever wondered what is above or below earth?... We have searched horizontally around us but I don't think we have searched vertically upwards or downwards...... And if we have then can you please make a video about it?
TED-Ed Why cant we just put 3 car batteries in a car and a daylight sensor on the hood of the car to charge the batteries and a fan to keep the batteries from heating up
Thanks for his video so informative OMG I just love it and once again form an 11-year old boy and if you can get me to watch these amazing videos imagine everyone else, keep it up TED-Ed
Seth Person Technically, they only use solar energy's heat to split water into free hydrogen and oxygen atoms to make glucose. They don't change solar energy to chemical, and even if they did it would be far too slow for our energy needs.
At my house, we have solar panels installed on the roof and they produce nearly double the energy we consume. Essentially all of the excess solar energy is sent back through the local energy supplier’s power grid. If a regular suburban household can provide its own power, the same can be done elsewhere on a larger scale.
Solar panels are more expensive than normal electricity and it takes a long time to break even, that's why most people don't purchase solar panels. To make it a on larger scale, I think the government should help to install the solar panels and subsidize a portion of it. This way people are accepting of the idea.
Jane Leelavathi In places like cities, the solar panels required to generate all of the electricity the city consumes is greater than the area of that city. Not to mention it would be astronomically expensive.
Nothing was said about availability of lithium and other minerals, that are needed for building solar and lithium batteries. Unfortunately, these resources are also scarce.
There are other kinds of batteries than lithium and other kinds of energy storage than batteries. We do need lithium and cobalt for electric cars, though. But there is plenty of potential in reclaiming those materials.
Nothing was said about getting and refining said materials, nor about the waste or negative environmental impact. Of course, referring to both solar, wind, and batteries.
@FloadingBar If we did that we would all be in the same mess that Texas and California are in right now. Renewable Energy is very unreliable and very costly.
@@thebigm4 I didn’t share my opinion on the subject, I was simply thanking the creators for keeping this short and sweet. So what I’m politely trying to say is: I didn’t ask I don’t care :)
We discussed this topic in our Ecology and Energy lecture just a few weeks ago! It really pushes young students to be innovative when faced with such a troubling problem. Thank your for beautifully animating our lecture. You guys are the best 💕
@@etiennelamole9565 Because they are far from dense cities usually situated on the coast. The desert is right in the centre. That's some long cables needed.
@@anontill5302 but, but... hear me out! Deserts may be far from cities, but chinese are not. Chinese are all over your country and goverment, so why not build a long cable made out of chinese and transport the energy through them?!?
And they're always propaganda, trying to move the world back to the stone age of uneducated serfs. They want us to be starving like the Germans, who can barely afford their energy (despite it being something like a mere 5% of their energy).
Van Ivanov I'm German and I don't know where you get your facts from but we're most definitly starving to get our energy. Renewable energy is the only way to go and on the long run way cheaper thas goal, oil etc.
Duka Duka They can also be destroyed meaning replacements need to be made and theirs the continually increasing population leading to more production and eventual shortage of lithium
Nah we're gonna recycle it (tesla is already doing that), besides in 30 years we're gonna have all sorts of different types of batteries. Nonexistent problem
One of the reasons I'm interested in compressed air as an energy storage system, though it looks like it's only got 10% of the Joules/kg as Li batteries. BUT! it doesn't have that issue with the rarity of lithium. You can make tanks out of carbon fiber.
🎯 Key points for quick navigation: Fossil fuel reserves are limited and running out, prompting the need for renewable energy sources. Renewable energy sources like sun, water, and wind are abundant and won't be depleted over time. Transitioning to 100% renewable energy is challenging due to cost and accessibility issues. Technology exists to capture energy from renewables, but efficiency and energy transportation are barriers. Superconductors could help transport electricity efficiently but currently require low temperatures. Storing renewable energy in a transportable form is a scientific challenge, especially for liquid fuels like aviation. Efficient ways to convert solar energy into chemical energy are being explored but are not market-ready yet. Transitioning to 100% renewable energy requires creativity, innovation, and incentives across technology, economics, and politics. Made with HARPA AI
I love this video. It is a good explanation for a grade school aptitude to understand the general challenges of renewable energy. I am one of the engineers working on this problem... I have been for the past 30 years.
Very nice video! Thanks! Can anybody tell me which battery can store 2.5 MJ/kg? From my research, I found that the best lithium-ion batteries today can store only about 1.1 MJ/kg.
Loved the video, I just love it when your video suddenly pops in my notifications, it is music to my ears and the way your video are so informative and helpful but so interesting at the same time that even an 11-year old boy like me would want to watch and look how much I am learning it's amazing thank you so much
Young Sir, your crafty use of the English language is outstanding for your age. If I may, I'd like to offer you some advice. Research "run on sentences" and you will see what I am talking about. Use DuckDuckGo.com because Google is a company that doesn't protect your privacy and sells your information for their gain. DuckDuckGo isn't like that. It's like cleaning a window. Also, a VPN, Virtual Private Network, such as Nord VPN (that's who I happen to use) prevents the paparazzi from photographing your data in the limo. It's the window tint. Thank you for being awesome. It's people just like you that make people just like me happy to enlist in the military; to break our bodies down, so y'll, can live the American Dream and we will rally up when we get back. Thanks for being one of the people who help make America awesome little buddy! I look forward to seeing what people like you make America into for me as I age. -US Army 2006-2011, -Signal Corps, -United We Stand! -Michael Happy Holidays! -US Army 2006-2011 -Signal Corps -United We Stand -Mike
I'm not sure how many historians there are here in the comment section, but it seems like to me that the modern world, and the United States in particular, have set in motion a chain of events that may lead to a total "systems collapse," in the very near future. "Systems collapse" is what happened to the western Roman empire in the 5th century, it's what happened to the Soviet Union in the 1990's, and it may happen to the United States and many other industrialized nations in the next few decades too. We've built a world today that's utterly dependent upon trade, both intentional and domestic. And this trade is absolutely essential for keeping international conflicts from springing up, it keeps our economies rolling, people employed, and it's a huge web that effects almost square inch of this planet today. And since literally ALL of that trade network relies upon petroleum powered transportation equipment ...well, you see where this is going right? We currently have no renewable way of powering the transportation infrastructure that this world relies upon everyday, and we've only got a few more decades to figure that problem out or we're fucked. A similar systems collapse event happened back during the end of the Bronze Age, and is known today as "The Late Bronze Age Collapse." In a period of only about ten year's time, TEN YEARS, every single kingdom located in modern-day Egypt, Greece, Cyprus, Crete, Anatolia (Turkey), Israel, and Syria was destroyed. Their societies all relied upon using bronze farming implements, like hoes and horse-drawn plows, to be able to feed their populations at the time. And when the bronze, a mixture of copper and the extremely rare element tin, started to be depleted to such an extent that bronze farming equipment could no longed be replaced affordably enough, reliably enough, or rapidly enough, the entire civilization, along with all of their trade networks, collapsed before they could find a replacement for their bronze. And since today every single person in the modern world relies almost solely upon petroleum powered agricultural equipment to keep us affordably clothed and fed, we too may in for a systems collapse event like the ones suffered by so many ancient nations that came before us.
I honestly can't believe that a TED-Ed video on renewable energy did not mention the discovery or advance in technological ways of harnessing nuclear fusion. Even though nuclear fusion isn't renewable, it's the cleanest possible form of energy. Don't get me wrong, i loved this video and found it very informative. Well done again TED-Ed!
Unfortunately, it seems that 2 accidents, along with the fossil fuel industry, did a very good job of convincing people, even scientists, that nuclear fission (let alone fusion when available), one of the safest and cleanest energy sources is somehow worse than fossil fuels. But that’s to be expected, after all, more people are scared of airplanes than cars, despite the former being the safest mode of transportation. It’s just that the accidents are more spectacular when they happen.
@@GRBtutorials Actually, more workers have died constructing and installing solar panels on roofs and wind turbines than have ever died in nuclear incidents. www.osha.gov/dep/greenjobs/windenergy.html www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/OHB/FACE/Pages/Solar.aspx
But we have very limited amounts of uranium and similar elements which r used in nuclear reactions. Moreover it's not a renewable energy as it consumes Uranium
I'm a big fan of compressed air energy storage, though estimates are apparently about 1/10 the MJ/Kg as the Li Ion batteries mentioned in the video. Still, the creation of the battery will have a larger footprint than the creation of a similarly weighted tank. But I think the real solution (or at least, the best stop-gap while we wait for solar to sufficiently advance), is nuclear. There's a lot of fear of nuclear power, but it's really safe, especially when you compare it to fossil fuel energy production.
I was wondering about it since my 8-9th class when I first studied Solar Cooker and Heater and Solar Cell... Now I got the answer.... Thank you very much ... For such brainstorming answer to the mindbending problem...💖💥
Thank you for the realistic look at the challenges of fueling our societies. One major fuel that is almost never talked about is thorium. It is not nearly as dangerous as uranium and there is enough thorium to power a large percentage of the planets fuel needs for a thousand years.
what about nuclear energy? small amount of nuclear material can generate electricity for years and and the waste though radioactive can disposed with effort because of low amounts by sealed containers or sent to space .
You all forget (or don't know) that there are two types of nuclear energy: the one we use today because it's the easiest one to get right (fission), but that produces waste and can cause catastrophic accidents; and the one who's still not advanced enough since it needs more energy than it gives (fusion), but is pretty clean and is very difficult for it to produce an accident. Fortunately, fusion is viable (just look at the Sun [not literally, please], it uses fusion and has been producing lots of energy for the past 4500 million years, the problem is to make it compact enough that can be on Earth).
You don't need millions, or even thousands of years of storage. With advanced Nuclear technologies where you fission all of the dangerous long lived radioactive elements, you are left with only fission products. The fission products will mostly all have decayed to background levels of radiation within 300 years, and most of them will have decayed much sooner than even that. Also, if you are using these advanced nuclear techniques then you are using the nuclear fuel dozens of times more efficiently, and so are generating dozens of times less waste per unit of energy produced than current reactors, in an industry that already produces very small amounts of waste.
TED-Ed, please make a video of "Why should you read Machado de Assis", and his books "Dom Casmurro" and "Memórias Póstumas de Brás Cubas"! It would help so much for people to know this great writer
@@Micaniker Huh? Isn't it obvious? I'm referencing the fact oil was, officially meant to have run out by now, I think twice. And the same goes for all the other laughably apocalyptic predictions. More than that, the ozone layer was meant to have been destroyed by now, and many scientists agreed with Al Gore that, "The Children won't know what snow is." Instead, kids FROZE in Texas. They had to change the name from Global Warming to Climate change, because their false predictions were so embarrassingly wrong. All of them... polar bears are "thriving" a recent study reckoned. God has made sure they can get nothing right. The flimsy computer model has proven laughably, desperately wrong, as well. The men of the future always laugh at the idiocy of the men of the past--and the same goes for people with enough braincells to read recent history.
Long story short, we need a nuclear renaissance and we need to use it's energy for hydrogen fuel cell production. Renewables and lithium batteries simply won't be enough (without magic technology that we may never obtain).
@@invernessfan3017 LMAO!! The USA is NOT Norway! They have a small population, small country, and ideal topography for hydro. It's too bad we can't run electric plants on dream-fuel. You knuckleheads would give us an infinite power source.
@@invernessfan3017 Well for starters that wouldn't exactly work for the US since we have a lot more people. And we likely wouldn't have enough space given the requirements. Same with wind and solar, they're simply too inefficient. If the US were to completely rely on wind and solar, it would take up over 25% of the landmass in America. We should be investing in Nuclear energy, specifically Thorium plants, since they are safe, small, and more productive
Renewables are great and we should keep developing and producing them. However, because of the issues mentioned in the video (among others), we should also be building new nuclear plants. They're also a very clean power source and with current technology could provide for all of our power needs. Either way, this stuff just needs to get us by until fusion power is sorted out. Then that will be the only power source we need.
Yeah, but natural catastrophes are still a thing and we see how Japan for example "benefits" from using nuclear energy. If only it would be more stable resource, but it's not.
Aleksandra Shhh with more modern nuclear technologies there is no risk of a fukushima like disaster. Liquid fuels are automatically drained in the event of any problems, without any human or machine intervention. There are so many more failsafes in modern designs. The reason for the safety misconceptions is because almost all existing plants are old, based on technology from 50 years ago.
Mine asteroids. Near unlimited fuel. In the mean time, green energy gurus will tell us coal and oil are going to run out for the fortieth time (and get it wrong for the fortieth time).
Thankfully, a lot of progress has been made since this video was released. One exciting development is the technology to drill deeper than we've ever drilled before to make geothermal energy accessible nearly anywhere we want it. Another is the rapid expansion of solar powered homes with suitable storage batteries. I think "renewable" is a misnomer, but geothermal and solar and wind are safely described as "inexhaustible." Geothermal plants can replace nearly every coal-fired plant in the world. Nearly every building can become both a solar and a wind farm as technology develops. Transportation may need to evolve to either run on electrically powered tracks or nuclear powered flight. And some of us may rediscover the beauty and efficiency of Pedal Power...
In terms of pumping out outdated propaganda consistently and attractively, sure. Interesting that now, about 50 years after the last time they said, "we'll run out of oil in 50 years!" they're saying it again.
me doing an assignment abt renewable energy : im not going to copy frm any website ted ed: posts video also me: *reading subtitles and copying them into my power point presentation*
4:17 Keep in mind though that EVs use around 90% of the energy while combustion engines loose most of the energy in the fuel through heat etc. having well below 50% efficiency.
It's not the question 'Can renewable power the world?' It's more of a question 'HOW the world will power itself with renewable?'. It Is Inevitable. And we have lots of room for improvement. Today's use of energy is appalling. We are like a man, who stacks ladders in a pile, to climb a 2 meter wall. With efficiency like that - it'll NEVER be enough of anything for us.
They don't get paid for nuclear propaganda, only for green propaganda. Nuclear actually allows people to live decent lives... it doesn't reduce them to serfdom.
Van Ivanov Renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear and is not running out of fuel. Renewable energy sources decentralise power and gives more people the ability to make, store and trade their own power how does that make them less free??
Man! uk, India has started a One Sun, One World, One Grid project, for a world-wide solar power grid. In the case of energy, this world has 2 main things to work on: 1. Manufacturing harnessing equipment like solar panels 2. Transportation of energy
What about micro grids? No need to build huge infrastructure. Just 5 kw solar and a powerwall is ok for most high cost electricity areas. Such as islands.
Hmm yep nice observation , they also tend to be very windy , problem with solar energy is when you get a cloudy weather streak , wind energy has the same problem , also sea water power depends on sea power that also changes
Safak Tan Ozkan micro grids will be a part of oir energy future I am sure. They are hard, though. With a very large grid you have very distributed supply and equally distributed demand. On a micro grid it is far harder to balance supply and demand, especially when using renewable sources. The current difficulty with adding distributed solar to the large grid is they weren't designed for that eventuality. Monitoring and management for loads of solar panels on loads of houses were not built in to the grids. My guess is that micro grid technology and management systems will be merged into large grids to form a grid of interconnected grids. This will greatly simplify balancing supply and load calculations. Disclaimer: All of this is just a semi-educated opinion.
A wind-farm on an Island would probably kill it's entire native bird species within a decade. Same for solar farms large enough to support cities. At huge costs, you'll be able to have electricity on a good day, for part of the day. I hope you're not having heart surgery when the power goes out.
Yeah the only real problem is that supply is not equal throughout the day unlike traditional sources but like Safak Tan Ozkan said we just need batteries to store the excess power
Love this! Isn't a decent alternative to liquid fuels converting to a renewable liquid fuel source? Such as algae based biofuels? This product has seen potential even used as jet fuel.
Tidal power would be a nice boon, I think. Seeing as most people live near the ocean already it makes it easy to give them power efficiently and it can provide power on a cycle similar to solar (not constantly but daily on and off). Also I'm in favor of people just using more mass transit instead of continuing to use inefficient private transportation. *Having said all that* these are not solutions that work for everyone but they're a nice start right and would extend how much longer we can use fossil fuels as a crutch before more universal solutions present themselves.
There are more issues with variable renewables (solar+wind) than are mentioned here, like variability. I don't think it's possible or even desirable to have 100% renewable grid. Many of these issues are easily addressed with nuclear energy, which has its own unique problem set, but would solve the climate crisis.
I work with superconducting power cables. The problem is not that the cable has to be cooled. The problem is the cost of superconducting materials and associated construction.
Renewables are great, but nuclear power needs to be part of the conversation as well. Trying to Eliminate the use of fossil fuels without nuclear power is basically like trying to run a marathon with your feet tied together.
What William Phillips said makes a lot of sense. Fission power gets too much hate from basically people misunderstanding why we use it. I just mention quickly that it's a lot safer than many people think it is, but this is TH-cam and I don't want to start a debate about that. ;) It defiantly has a lot of weaknesses, mainly that it makes people feel unsafe, so it is generally hard to invest money in something that will receive a lot of criticism. But the reason we can't get around using it is basically this: we just really really really need it. A power grid needs predictable energy production to function, here's green energy really bad when the fossils are really useful. If we want to scale back the amount of fossils in the electricity production we need the stable and predictable nuclear to take a greater share. The grid needs to be balanced and that's not an easy thing to do. Also, discarding fission but praising fusion is a little dangerous, if we know something is it that we need to do something pronto to deal with replacing fossils. It's not a good bet to just hope that we solve fusion in the future. I hope that we do, but decisions must be made on what we know now.
Ed S I don't think it's that easy. To start with, the rest products can be handled very safe, when we have filled our final deposit for the rest products here in Sweden we will cover it up and it will affect no one. But your point is still valid I will give you, if you feel the rest products are a hurdle you can't get over it's fine. But it would be at the cost of being able to replace fossil fuels. As I said, renewables can't do it alone, and that is only considering that renewable energy sources can't result in a stable energy mix.
We now have nuclear waste from old nuclear weapons irrespective of whether or not we have nuclear energy. Even if we build no new nuclear weapons, we still have old waste. If we invest in safe disposal (or better yet, safe re-cycling) of old nuclear weapons waste, (which we should do regardless of energy policy) we will obtain methods for safe disposal of nuclear energy waste as a bonus. And once we've developed a method to dispose of the waste, then most of the other reasonable (or un-reasonable) objections to nuclear electrical generation become comparatively trivial.
My teacher one asked me, "If the law of conservation states that energy cannot be created nor be destroyed, and it just transforms, then what happens to the body's energy when we die?" Does it go to heaven? Dies it transferred to another organism? I know it breaks down to heat during decomposition, but this is a question worthy of discussion. Right?
To whom do I turn to build a “4th Gen” nuclear reactor? They won’t be ready for at least ten years and you know it. We can build wind and solar right now. And HVDC interconnections, and energy storage, of which there are many types. Even some processes that cannot be electrified could be covered by hydrogen-derived fuels. Not saying things like Seaborg Technologies aren’t exciting, but they’re not a tool for what we need to do right now.
@@meh23p Well perhaps we should be content for now with 3rd generation reactors, wind and solar is not giving us the energy we need , not even with all the energy storage in the wold. The result, more coal. Look at Germany a country with a lot of solar and wind but on the other hand a lot of pollution because of lignite burning since they choose to shutdown their nuclear reactors because of Fukoshima. and if you want hydrogen derived fuels (NH3) you can easily do that with an abundance of constant, dependable energy. That energy is not going to be solar of wind since it is to little, will put strains on the grid and is unreliable. So yes if you want a wold that is cleaner, saver, and has a winter or two, user nuclear power !
@@meh23p Germany spent 580 Billion USD to develop renewable energy and only does around 50% clean energy now. If they spent that amount of money on 58 3rd gen nuclear power plants, they would have had 100% clean energy EASY
Hey TED-ed, this video is pretty out of date, be great if you can updated it. 1. The price on the earth and human labor of the mining of material for solar panels 2. Asking energy reduction and the question of : "what do we really need energy for" 3. Real cost of lithium batteries and their lack of decomposing / poisoning the earth. 2. Other energy alternatives ( and their impact on environmental health and public health) Thanks,
Great insight into the build just subscribed and it’s a nice compact turbine I also have built a homemade 650 watts wind turbine, a treadmill motor turbine and a little but powerful ametek 30v turbine and built 2 diy solar panels, be careful in high winds one of my first turbines blew up 😕and now have only 2 wonderful turbines working daily 😊it’s very satisfying watching those things working, keep up the good work buddy 👍
Two huge problems either touched on or ignored in this commentary: cost of building so many turbines or solar panels, and the absolute volume of raw materials needed. Both are more than prohibitive. I also noted that Nuclear, the largest supplier of emission-free, green power, wasn't mentioned, even though it can easily be configured to be a renewable energy source as well (you can produce more fuel than you consume--making it more renewable than wind and solar in absolute terms). If we want to break dependence on fossil fuel, we have to massive increase our investment and use of nuclear energy technologies. I'd love to see TedEd talk about that.
Great video!!! I work with alternative energies in Colombia. It's pretty hard. In spite of, we haven't advanced because government is quite corrupted. Ww need help.
Let the actual demand take control of what we use, not politics. When the government gets involved, things fail hard. We should look at better nuclear technologies for power, such as thorium reactors and molten salt reactors.
An issue is that methods of harvesting renewable energy are still harmful to the environment (although certainly not as bad as fossil fuels). To give a few examples, wind farms create noise pollution, take up a fair amount of space and may impact the animals living in the area negatively. Hydrodams and ocean turbines aren't great either as they can inflict great damage on the ecosystem they're placed in, with the bed of the ocean/river being disturbed and animals being misplaced, harmed or even killed. Solar power does take up space but it can also get pretty damn hot if a lot of them are placed together to create a solar farm since they were created to attract sunlight. To top it all off these sources of energy like wind and sun aren't exactly avalible all year around in most places. Great TED talk since it talks about the fact that greater economic changes need to be made with the increase of renewable energy farms.
As for stuff like Geothermal, not only is it super scarce and super expensive in non-ideal areas, but it can also cause earthquakes, which requires no explanation as to why that would be disastrous.
Energy return on energy invested. Photovoltaic 1.6, biomass 3.5, Wind 3,9 they are under the economic line of 7. Natural gas 28, coal 30 and water 35. Nuclear powerplants pressurised water reactor with solid fuel rods 75. Dual Fluid reactor 2000
Truflame ALL we have to do is make a grid sized bedini motor but instead have a magnetic switch we use a pulse-width modulator and two coils as the prime mover and the whole system would run on say 5 solar panels maybe like 10 or 20 batteries during the day time the solar tracker would not only power of the pulse-width MODULATOR but wod charge the 20 batteries in parallel and during the night the batteries would power.
Fusion is trying to do what the sun does but here on earth. It's a long shot, but worth it. Here is where scientist currently are: th-cam.com/video/knrHPneSN10/w-d-xo.html
Wael Karram waste that's dangerous for millions of years is a serious hurdle. Also the expense of building them. On top of that there is the fact that the light water plants currently in use are only use 3 percent of the energy of uranium.
2:06 "It's been estimated that a surface that spans several hundred kilometers would be needed to power human at our present usage levels". Why don't we build that? Cause its impossible.
A very informative video. It also encourages us to utilize solar energy at the household-level. If an entire airport (Cochin International Airport) can be fully solar-powered, atleast it can be done at smaller levels.
Chernobyl, fukushima.... one little mistake/disaster and that city is condemned for 100,000 years. nuclear is great for energy, but the risk in my opinion is too much. I live in the uk and have solar panels (a small 4kw system) we barely have any sun but my electricity bill is halved. simple solution every home adopt solar panels with a few wind turbines and the entire city could run on renewable energy.
Thank you so much to everyone supporting us on Patreon! You are helping amplify the voices of scientists working towards a more sustainable future. If you'd like to learn more about how to get involved, check out our Patreon page: bit.ly/2BRTjYU
TED-Ed Have you ever wondered what is above or below earth?... We have searched horizontally around us but I don't think we have searched vertically upwards or downwards...... And if we have then can you please make a video about it?
TED-Ed I thought that tar sands gave us enough oil so that by the time the tar sands run out, there’ll be more oil
TED-Ed Why cant we just put 3 car batteries in a car and a daylight sensor on the hood of the car to charge the batteries and a fan to keep the batteries from heating up
Excuse me Mr./Ms./Mrs. TED-Ed, I hope you don't get offended with me asking but can you post videos more frequently
Thanks for his video so informative OMG I just love it and once again form an 11-year old boy and if you can get me to watch these amazing videos imagine everyone else, keep it up TED-Ed
easy, we just make doors into kid's rooms and get monsters to harness their scream energy
But laughter is more powerful.
Good one
was this a Monster Inc. reference?
@Aidan Tijerina That's not a woooosh
Ginger and a Fox 🤣🤣🤣I love that movie
I binge watch ted-ed more than Netflix whats wrong with me?
average human nothing, you just spent your time better than most of us.
LOL i do the same but i don't have Netflix so i go online
You wanna be smart.
average human coz Netflix is producing bad anime movie adaptation i guess
Boring
Whoa! Turning solar energy into chemical energy! That sounds so advanced!
Oh wait... Every plant on Earth does that.
Seth Person Technically, they only use solar energy's heat to split water into free hydrogen and oxygen atoms to make glucose. They don't change solar energy to chemical, and even if they did it would be far too slow for our energy needs.
Nicole Barajas I know. Just joking around. All though, I would argue that glucose stores chemical energy. This is the basis of cellular respiration.
Our computer is based on 1 and 0. There's no such thing as "too slow".
Better is use nuclear energy "more" directly...
👉 exactly
THIS CHANNEL DESERVES AN OSCAR FOR ANIMATION NOT ONLY IN THIS VIDEO BUT IN EVERY VIDEO IT SURPASSES IT'S PREVIOUS ANIMATIONS
„scientists are working on changing solar into chemical energy”
plants: am i a joke to you
yeah we could use lava or plants to make energy
MASTER FAZE Try hard gamer lava?
Problem is they aren't that efficient
U guys are thinking same as i thought about making howeboard using earths magnetic field 😭😭😭😭😭
@@umadadhich3866 And I didn't even think that.
At my house, we have solar panels installed on the roof and they produce nearly double the energy we consume. Essentially all of the excess solar energy is sent back through the local energy supplier’s power grid. If a regular suburban household can provide its own power, the same can be done elsewhere on a larger scale.
Jane Leelavathi how many panels do you have? How much is one?
I have 5 panels and I generate around 5 to 8 KW each day, and I have a steady consumption of 5 KW daily
Solar panels are more expensive than normal electricity and it takes a long time to break even, that's why most people don't purchase solar panels. To make it a on larger scale, I think the government should help to install the solar panels and subsidize a portion of it. This way people are accepting of the idea.
Jane Leelavathi In places like cities, the solar panels required to generate all of the electricity the city consumes is greater than the area of that city. Not to mention it would be astronomically expensive.
Dat Boi Fusion we are extremely close to solar panel windows that would allow for buildings to be powered on their own
I’m seeing 2 years comment..I’m here 2020 cause of quarantine. Please tell me I’m not the only one 😭😂
Takara’s Dream 259 your not the only one 🥺😂🤣
Hi
Not the only one 😜
let me guess you also were sent bc of homework ??
th-cam.com/video/VGHa6XwJo54/w-d-xo.html
Nothing was said about availability of lithium and other minerals, that are needed for building solar and lithium batteries. Unfortunately, these resources are also scarce.
Aleksandra Shhh Those chemicals and metals are also quite bad for the earth
yes, and that mining them involves creating radioactive lakes in China and child labor in the Congo.
There are other kinds of batteries than lithium and other kinds of energy storage than batteries. We do need lithium and cobalt for electric cars, though. But there is plenty of potential in reclaiming those materials.
Oil is actually a renewable resource and in comparison to the materials needed for solar, it's a much viable one.
Nothing was said about getting and refining said materials, nor about the waste or negative environmental impact. Of course, referring to both solar, wind, and batteries.
2:12
An optical illusion
you can see dark dots inside the white dots around your vision, but once you look directly at the dark dots - they are gone
no
Some of the dark dots in the white dots are actually there.
Ummm, can't see it.
0:07 Earth isn't spinning. The map is sliding or the pinhole is moving.
Zohar Nakash that's actually a pretty good illusion!
0:47 That animation is so surreal, almost like a utopia that gives a happy vibe. It's like a child's painting from school.
I'm so happy my science teacher sent me this to study off of instead of some 30 minute documentary
@FloadingBar If we did that we would all be in the same mess that Texas and California are in right now. Renewable Energy is very unreliable and very costly.
@@thebigm4 I didn’t share my opinion on the subject, I was simply thanking the creators for keeping this short and sweet.
So what I’m politely trying to say is:
I didn’t ask
I don’t care
:)
Yea doing this for AP Human Geography
@@diegopills Where do you live?
Same
We discussed this topic in our Ecology and Energy lecture just a few weeks ago! It really pushes young students to be innovative when faced with such a troubling problem. Thank your for beautifully animating our lecture. You guys are the best 💕
thanks for appreciating the animation :)
"Deserts are far away"
-not here in Australia.
SO WHY DON'T YOU UTILIZE THEM 😭
@@etiennelamole9565 Because they are far from dense cities usually situated on the coast. The desert is right in the centre. That's some long cables needed.
Yeah it's relative, here in Egypt it's basically a desert.
@@anontill5302 but, but... hear me out! Deserts may be far from cities, but chinese are not. Chinese are all over your country and goverment, so why not build a long cable made out of chinese and transport the energy through them?!?
Also here in the US we have like 4 or 5 states that are deserts.......
The voice .
I've been hearing this for years and I still love it...
It's peaceful
Your animations are always awesome and beautiful. Great work Ted-Ed 👌👌👌👌
THANK YOU :)))
And they're always propaganda, trying to move the world back to the stone age of uneducated serfs. They want us to be starving like the Germans, who can barely afford their energy (despite it being something like a mere 5% of their energy).
Van Ivanov I'm German and I don't know where you get your facts from but we're most definitly starving to get our energy. Renewable energy is the only way to go and on the long run way cheaper thas goal, oil etc.
His animations are bad
@@vanivanov9571 lol bs
The general public actually shocks me at how much they can say without doing actual research
The problem with batteries is that lithium is almost as limited as oil, if the entire world used it we’d run out within 100 years
Matthew Ginn batteries can be recharged
Duka Duka They can also be destroyed meaning replacements need to be made and theirs the continually increasing population leading to more production and eventual shortage of lithium
Nah we're gonna recycle it (tesla is already doing that), besides in 30 years we're gonna have all sorts of different types of batteries. Nonexistent problem
One of the reasons I'm interested in compressed air as an energy storage system, though it looks like it's only got 10% of the Joules/kg as Li batteries. BUT! it doesn't have that issue with the rarity of lithium. You can make tanks out of carbon fiber.
Andrew Edwards Compressed air is an interesting idea but I think everyone can agree fusion reactors are the future of energy China certainly thinks so
🎯 Key points for quick navigation:
Fossil fuel reserves are limited and running out, prompting the need for renewable energy sources.
Renewable energy sources like sun, water, and wind are abundant and won't be depleted over time.
Transitioning to 100% renewable energy is challenging due to cost and accessibility issues.
Technology exists to capture energy from renewables, but efficiency and energy transportation are barriers.
Superconductors could help transport electricity efficiently but currently require low temperatures.
Storing renewable energy in a transportable form is a scientific challenge, especially for liquid fuels like aviation.
Efficient ways to convert solar energy into chemical energy are being explored but are not market-ready yet.
Transitioning to 100% renewable energy requires creativity, innovation, and incentives across technology, economics, and politics.
Made with HARPA AI
You're god-sent, thank you!
I love this video. It is a good explanation for a grade school aptitude to understand the general challenges of renewable energy. I am one of the engineers working on this problem... I have been for the past 30 years.
Very nice video! Thanks!
Can anybody tell me which battery can store 2.5 MJ/kg? From my research, I found that the best lithium-ion batteries today can store only about 1.1 MJ/kg.
Hydrogen batteries.
That's kind of the idea- we need more time for innovation
Atomic battery
ni-63 atomic battery maybe?
@@pronelason there very expensive, aren't they?
0:06 Earth animation is "rotating" the wrong way!
Yeah it's rotating east to west
Concluding, the renewable energy pipe dream is never going to happen. Let's shift to nuclear energy and develop nuclear fusion!
Loved the video, I just love it when your video suddenly pops in my notifications, it is music to my ears and the way your video are so informative and helpful but so interesting at the same time that even an 11-year old boy like me would want to watch and look how much I am learning it's amazing thank you so much
Young Sir, your crafty use of the English language is outstanding for your age. If I may, I'd like to offer you some advice. Research "run on sentences" and you will see what I am talking about. Use DuckDuckGo.com because Google is a company that doesn't protect your privacy and sells your information for their gain. DuckDuckGo isn't like that. It's like cleaning a window. Also, a VPN, Virtual Private Network, such as Nord VPN (that's who I happen to use) prevents the paparazzi from photographing your data in the limo. It's the window tint. Thank you for being awesome. It's people just like you that make people just like me happy to enlist in the military; to break our bodies down, so y'll, can live the American Dream and we will rally up when we get back. Thanks for being one of the people who help make America awesome little buddy! I look forward to seeing what people like you make America into for me as I age.
-US Army 2006-2011,
-Signal Corps,
-United We Stand!
-Michael
Happy Holidays!
-US Army 2006-2011
-Signal Corps
-United We Stand
-Mike
bro quit glazing
I'm not sure how many historians there are here in the comment section, but it seems like to me that the modern world, and the United States in particular, have set in motion a chain of events that may lead to a total "systems collapse," in the very near future. "Systems collapse" is what happened to the western Roman empire in the 5th century, it's what happened to the Soviet Union in the 1990's, and it may happen to the United States and many other industrialized nations in the next few decades too. We've built a world today that's utterly dependent upon trade, both intentional and domestic. And this trade is absolutely essential for keeping international conflicts from springing up, it keeps our economies rolling, people employed, and it's a huge web that effects almost square inch of this planet today. And since literally ALL of that trade network relies upon petroleum powered transportation equipment ...well, you see where this is going right? We currently have no renewable way of powering the transportation infrastructure that this world relies upon everyday, and we've only got a few more decades to figure that problem out or we're fucked.
A similar systems collapse event happened back during the end of the Bronze Age, and is known today as "The Late Bronze Age Collapse." In a period of only about ten year's time, TEN YEARS, every single kingdom located in modern-day Egypt, Greece, Cyprus, Crete, Anatolia (Turkey), Israel, and Syria was destroyed. Their societies all relied upon using bronze farming implements, like hoes and horse-drawn plows, to be able to feed their populations at the time. And when the bronze, a mixture of copper and the extremely rare element tin, started to be depleted to such an extent that bronze farming equipment could no longed be replaced affordably enough, reliably enough, or rapidly enough, the entire civilization, along with all of their trade networks, collapsed before they could find a replacement for their bronze. And since today every single person in the modern world relies almost solely upon petroleum powered agricultural equipment to keep us affordably clothed and fed, we too may in for a systems collapse event like the ones suffered by so many ancient nations that came before us.
I honestly can't believe that a TED-Ed video on renewable energy did not mention the discovery or advance in technological ways of harnessing nuclear fusion. Even though nuclear fusion isn't renewable, it's the cleanest possible form of energy. Don't get me wrong, i loved this video and found it very informative. Well done again TED-Ed!
Based
They didn't mention it because nuclear fusion isn't renewable
Who else is here because of ur teacher
Omg i am dying from boredom bro
😂😂😂
Not me
me
Meee
5:00
"[to develop clean energy alternatives] we need powerful incentives."
You mean, more powerful than the continued survival of modern civilization?
You'd think that'd be enough
Its not because the average human mind doesnt focus about the long term and likes to run away from doomsday prophecies. Its sad really.
What's that phrase that starts with "N" and ends with "uclear power"?
Unfortunately, it seems that 2 accidents, along with the fossil fuel industry, did a very good job of convincing people, even scientists, that nuclear fission (let alone fusion when available), one of the safest and cleanest energy sources is somehow worse than fossil fuels. But that’s to be expected, after all, more people are scared of airplanes than cars, despite the former being the safest mode of transportation. It’s just that the accidents are more spectacular when they happen.
@@GRBtutorials Kurgesagt has a 3 very good videos on Nuclear power
@@GRBtutorials Actually, more workers have died constructing and installing solar panels on roofs and wind turbines than have ever died in nuclear incidents.
www.osha.gov/dep/greenjobs/windenergy.html
www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/OHB/FACE/Pages/Solar.aspx
But we have very limited amounts of uranium and similar elements which r used in nuclear reactions.
Moreover it's not a renewable energy as it consumes Uranium
@@sankalp2520 Breeder reactors produce more fissile material than they use:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor
I'm a big fan of compressed air energy storage, though estimates are apparently about 1/10 the MJ/Kg as the Li Ion batteries mentioned in the video. Still, the creation of the battery will have a larger footprint than the creation of a similarly weighted tank.
But I think the real solution (or at least, the best stop-gap while we wait for solar to sufficiently advance), is nuclear. There's a lot of fear of nuclear power, but it's really safe, especially when you compare it to fossil fuel energy production.
ARE U KIDDING ME I WISH THIS WAS UPLOADED YESTARDAY SINCE THATS WHEN OUR CLASS HAD A TEST ON THIS
I was wondering about it since my 8-9th class when I first studied Solar Cooker and Heater and Solar Cell... Now I got the answer.... Thank you very much ... For such brainstorming answer to the mindbending problem...💖💥
Thank you for the realistic look at the challenges of fueling our societies. One major fuel that is almost never talked about is thorium. It is not nearly as dangerous as uranium and there is enough thorium to power a large percentage of the planets fuel needs for a thousand years.
what about nuclear energy? small amount of nuclear material can generate electricity for years and and the waste though radioactive can disposed with effort because of low amounts by sealed containers or sent to space .
Actually it can't be sent into space but yeah, it's the best option.
Sending nuclear waste into space makes absolutely zero sense at this time and in the foreseeable future, it's way too expensive and energy-consuming
You all forget (or don't know) that there are two types of nuclear energy: the one we use today because it's the easiest one to get right (fission), but that produces waste and can cause catastrophic accidents; and the one who's still not advanced enough since it needs more energy than it gives (fusion), but is pretty clean and is very difficult for it to produce an accident. Fortunately, fusion is viable (just look at the Sun [not literally, please], it uses fusion and has been producing lots of energy for the past 4500 million years, the problem is to make it compact enough that can be on Earth).
You don't need millions, or even thousands of years of storage. With advanced Nuclear technologies where you fission all of the dangerous long lived radioactive elements, you are left with only fission products. The fission products will mostly all have decayed to background levels of radiation within 300 years, and most of them will have decayed much sooner than even that.
Also, if you are using these advanced nuclear techniques then you are using the nuclear fuel dozens of times more efficiently, and so are generating dozens of times less waste per unit of energy produced than current reactors, in an industry that already produces very small amounts of waste.
Not renewable
3:17 "...lose 6%-8%" but for which distance?
250 meter I guess
I love Ted-ed so much, I have actually binged countless talks on the app
TED-Ed, please make a video of "Why should you read Machado de Assis", and his books "Dom Casmurro" and "Memórias Póstumas de Brás Cubas"! It would help so much for people to know this great writer
Giovana Verzignassi become a patreon is more likely for them to see your request.
Obed Sierra How do I become one?
why do you want people to read those books?
Giovana Verzignassi Use the link at the end of the video
Vorname Nachname Thank You! I hadn't noticed it
I love your videos man, they are just awasome
Lying is awesome? Really, they told you oil would run out in 50 years, *fifty years ago.* But I guess well-made propaganda is an art of itself.
@@Micaniker Huh? Isn't it obvious? I'm referencing the fact oil was, officially meant to have run out by now, I think twice. And the same goes for all the other laughably apocalyptic predictions.
More than that, the ozone layer was meant to have been destroyed by now, and many scientists agreed with Al Gore that, "The Children won't know what snow is." Instead, kids FROZE in Texas.
They had to change the name from Global Warming to Climate change, because their false predictions were so embarrassingly wrong. All of them... polar bears are "thriving" a recent study reckoned. God has made sure they can get nothing right.
The flimsy computer model has proven laughably, desperately wrong, as well. The men of the future always laugh at the idiocy of the men of the past--and the same goes for people with enough braincells to read recent history.
Long story short, we need a nuclear renaissance and we need to use it's energy for hydrogen fuel cell production. Renewables and lithium batteries simply won't be enough (without magic technology that we may never obtain).
Nuclear energy can also be used to synthesize hydrocarbon fuel, which is carbon-neutral since it is created from carbon dioxide pulled out of the air.
Wrong. 98% of Norway's electricity comes from hydro electricity. Hydro electrixcity, is safe, tested and reliable.
@@invernessfan3017 LMAO!! The USA is NOT Norway! They have a small population, small country, and ideal topography for hydro. It's too bad we can't run electric plants on dream-fuel. You knuckleheads would give us an infinite power source.
@@invernessfan3017 Well for starters that wouldn't exactly work for the US since we have a lot more people. And we likely wouldn't have enough space given the requirements. Same with wind and solar, they're simply too inefficient. If the US were to completely rely on wind and solar, it would take up over 25% of the landmass in America. We should be investing in Nuclear energy, specifically Thorium plants, since they are safe, small, and more productive
@@invernessfan3017 hydroelectric is the most dangerous form of renewable energy
Nuclear power supplemented by Solar, wind, biomass and tidal power is the solution for future.
tidal power, what about the poor fishes in the water.?
@@sparklewithtrishpparklanej6468 make filter screens that prevent the fish from getting inside hydro devices
@ProgramKing nuclear plants take a long time to build and cost a lot to build
@@robinsss nothing economy of the scale can't sort.
Modular design makes them both cheaper and faster to build.
@@michazajac5881 give me some proof
1:08 the gears are turning in others directions
Renewables are great and we should keep developing and producing them. However, because of the issues mentioned in the video (among others), we should also be building new nuclear plants. They're also a very clean power source and with current technology could provide for all of our power needs.
Either way, this stuff just needs to get us by until fusion power is sorted out. Then that will be the only power source we need.
Yeah, but natural catastrophes are still a thing and we see how Japan for example "benefits" from using nuclear energy. If only it would be more stable resource, but it's not.
Aleksandra Shhh with more modern nuclear technologies there is no risk of a fukushima like disaster. Liquid fuels are automatically drained in the event of any problems, without any human or machine intervention. There are so many more failsafes in modern designs. The reason for the safety misconceptions is because almost all existing plants are old, based on technology from 50 years ago.
Mine asteroids. Near unlimited fuel. In the mean time, green energy gurus will tell us coal and oil are going to run out for the fortieth time (and get it wrong for the fortieth time).
It doesn't really matter if coal and oil run out. We can't afford to burn all of what we have if we want to keep global warming to a manageable level.
In Europe, burning fossil fuels kills 22,000 per year. Fukushima zero. How is nuclear not a stable resource?
I need to say that I absolutely love this video, TedEd is the best ❤️
I'm interested in such topics! I'm wondering if you can make more episodes about energy and how to use it in everyday life. Nice work, TedEd! Love it!
Can we just appreciate the animation style? Lowkey love it
Thankfully, a lot of progress has been made since this video was released. One exciting development is the technology to drill deeper than we've ever drilled before to make geothermal energy accessible nearly anywhere we want it. Another is the rapid expansion of solar powered homes with suitable storage batteries. I think "renewable" is a misnomer, but geothermal and solar and wind are safely described as "inexhaustible." Geothermal plants can replace nearly every coal-fired plant in the world. Nearly every building can become both a solar and a wind farm as technology develops. Transportation may need to evolve to either run on electrically powered tracks or nuclear powered flight. And some of us may rediscover the beauty and efficiency of Pedal Power...
Also, exciting things happening with batteries made out of iron salt...
Evolve to run on electrically powered tracks? You mean trains?
Ted ed best channel.
In terms of pumping out outdated propaganda consistently and attractively, sure. Interesting that now, about 50 years after the last time they said, "we'll run out of oil in 50 years!" they're saying it again.
Van Ivanov Ted talks only existed for 31 years
As always, nice and easily understandable video! Thanks for giving information and animation is TOO EXPENSIVE 😁
4:43 well, it looks like plants got a billion year head start on that
me doing an assignment abt renewable energy : im not going to copy frm any website
ted ed: posts video
also me: *reading subtitles and copying them into my power point presentation*
4:17 Keep in mind though that EVs use around 90% of the energy while combustion engines loose most of the energy in the fuel through heat etc. having well below 50% efficiency.
It's not the question 'Can renewable power the world?' It's more of a question 'HOW the world will power itself with renewable?'. It Is Inevitable. And we have lots of room for improvement. Today's use of energy is appalling. We are like a man, who stacks ladders in a pile, to climb a 2 meter wall. With efficiency like that - it'll NEVER be enough of anything for us.
I'm kinda surprised you neglect nuclear power on this topic.
They don't get paid for nuclear propaganda, only for green propaganda. Nuclear actually allows people to live decent lives... it doesn't reduce them to serfdom.
Van Ivanov nuclear fuel is a finite resource. Also requires proper engineering to ensure safety and stability.
Van Ivanov Renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear and is not running out of fuel. Renewable energy sources decentralise power and gives more people the ability to make, store and trade their own power how does that make them less free??
Because nuclear isn't renewable
Bernie Sanders Very true.
I've learned more in this video then a whole year of school
Man! uk, India has started a One Sun, One World, One Grid project, for a world-wide solar power grid. In the case of energy, this world has 2 main things to work on:
1. Manufacturing harnessing equipment like solar panels
2. Transportation of energy
I'm fascinated about the animation in this video :D
What about micro grids? No need to build huge infrastructure. Just 5 kw solar and a powerwall is ok for most high cost electricity areas. Such as islands.
Hmm yep nice observation , they also tend to be very windy , problem with solar energy is when you get a cloudy weather streak , wind energy has the same problem , also sea water power depends on sea power that also changes
Safak Tan Ozkan micro grids will be a part of oir energy future I am sure. They are hard, though. With a very large grid you have very distributed supply and equally distributed demand. On a micro grid it is far harder to balance supply and demand, especially when using renewable sources.
The current difficulty with adding distributed solar to the large grid is they weren't designed for that eventuality. Monitoring and management for loads of solar panels on loads of houses were not built in to the grids.
My guess is that micro grid technology and management systems will be merged into large grids to form a grid of interconnected grids. This will greatly simplify balancing supply and load calculations.
Disclaimer: All of this is just a semi-educated opinion.
A wind-farm on an Island would probably kill it's entire native bird species within a decade. Same for solar farms large enough to support cities. At huge costs, you'll be able to have electricity on a good day, for part of the day. I hope you're not having heart surgery when the power goes out.
Just throw in a bunch of batteries into the equation and you solve all the balancing issues :)
Yeah the only real problem is that supply is not equal throughout the day unlike traditional sources but like Safak Tan Ozkan said we just need batteries to store the excess power
Love this! Isn't a decent alternative to liquid fuels converting to a renewable liquid fuel source? Such as algae based biofuels? This product has seen potential even used as jet fuel.
Tidal power would be a nice boon, I think. Seeing as most people live near the ocean already it makes it easy to give them power efficiently and it can provide power on a cycle similar to solar (not constantly but daily on and off). Also I'm in favor of people just using more mass transit instead of continuing to use inefficient private transportation. *Having said all that* these are not solutions that work for everyone but they're a nice start right and would extend how much longer we can use fossil fuels as a crutch before more universal solutions present themselves.
"Oh this video is good"
0:03 Edison's quote
*LEAVES VID*
love the art you guys are making😁
There are more issues with variable renewables (solar+wind) than are mentioned here, like variability.
I don't think it's possible or even desirable to have 100% renewable grid. Many of these issues are easily addressed with nuclear energy, which has its own unique problem set, but would solve the climate crisis.
We value your works,, keep giving us more informations
I’m addicted to ted-Ed who’s with me?
Me
I work with superconducting power cables. The problem is not that the cable has to be cooled. The problem is the cost of superconducting materials and associated construction.
Thanks for a clear video, explaining the challenges (technical and political), in a way most people can understand. Oh, and being positive!
Renewables are great, but nuclear power needs to be part of the conversation as well. Trying to Eliminate the use of fossil fuels without nuclear power is basically like trying to run a marathon with your feet tied together.
William Phillips ... terrible idea
What William Phillips said makes a lot of sense. Fission power gets too much hate from basically people misunderstanding why we use it. I just mention quickly that it's a lot safer than many people think it is, but this is TH-cam and I don't want to start a debate about that. ;) It defiantly has a lot of weaknesses, mainly that it makes people feel unsafe, so it is generally hard to invest money in something that will receive a lot of criticism. But the reason we can't get around using it is basically this: we just really really really need it. A power grid needs predictable energy production to function, here's green energy really bad when the fossils are really useful. If we want to scale back the amount of fossils in the electricity production we need the stable and predictable nuclear to take a greater share. The grid needs to be balanced and that's not an easy thing to do. Also, discarding fission but praising fusion is a little dangerous, if we know something is it that we need to do something pronto to deal with replacing fossils. It's not a good bet to just hope that we solve fusion in the future. I hope that we do, but decisions must be made on what we know now.
Adam Linde ... when the waste from an energy will be deadly for hundreds of thousands of years it is not a good idea.
Ed S I don't think it's that easy. To start with, the rest products can be handled very safe, when we have filled our final deposit for the rest products here in Sweden we will cover it up and it will affect no one. But your point is still valid I will give you, if you feel the rest products are a hurdle you can't get over it's fine. But it would be at the cost of being able to replace fossil fuels. As I said, renewables can't do it alone, and that is only considering that renewable energy sources can't result in a stable energy mix.
We now have nuclear waste from old nuclear weapons irrespective of whether or not we have nuclear energy. Even if we build no new nuclear weapons, we still have old waste. If we invest in safe disposal (or better yet, safe re-cycling) of old nuclear weapons waste, (which we should do regardless of energy policy) we will obtain methods for safe disposal of nuclear energy waste as a bonus. And once we've developed a method to dispose of the waste, then most of the other reasonable (or un-reasonable) objections to nuclear electrical generation become comparatively trivial.
Animation work is simply the best on TED-ex, totally easy to understand and creative.
renewable energy requires fossil energy. At least for the moment.
2:13 if you pause the video and see, all the dots are not hollow
Thank you TED-ED
My teacher one asked me,
"If the law of conservation states that energy cannot be created nor be destroyed, and it just transforms, then what happens to the body's energy when we die?"
Does it go to heaven? Dies it transferred to another organism?
I know it breaks down to heat during decomposition, but this is a question worthy of discussion. Right?
4th gen nuclear, all the rest is marketing and dreams
Amen !
To whom do I turn to build a “4th Gen” nuclear reactor? They won’t be ready for at least ten years and you know it. We can build wind and solar right now. And HVDC interconnections, and energy storage, of which there are many types. Even some processes that cannot be electrified could be covered by hydrogen-derived fuels.
Not saying things like Seaborg Technologies aren’t exciting, but they’re not a tool for what we need to do right now.
@@meh23p Well perhaps we should be content for now with 3rd generation reactors, wind and solar is not giving us the energy we need , not even with all the energy storage in the wold.
The result, more coal. Look at Germany a country with a lot of solar and wind but on the other hand a lot of pollution because of lignite burning since they choose to shutdown their nuclear reactors because of Fukoshima. and if you want hydrogen derived fuels (NH3) you can easily do that with an abundance of constant, dependable energy.
That energy is not going to be solar of wind since it is to little, will put strains on the grid and is unreliable. So yes if you want a wold that is cleaner, saver, and has a winter or two, user nuclear power !
@@meh23p Germany spent 580 Billion USD to develop renewable energy and only does around 50% clean energy now. If they spent that amount of money on 58 3rd gen nuclear power plants, they would have had 100% clean energy EASY
@@jamesturgay3641
Yes. Nuclear MUST be part of the energy future. We especially need liquid metal and gas cooled fast breeder nuclear reactors.
"Just do it! Make your dreams come true! Nothing is impossible! Yes you can! "
Tahnks bro we will do it I am young engineer who is searching for green energy!
A lot of things are impossible. solar panels will not fly people over an ocean at 300 mph. only dreams and fossil fuels can do that.
That's actually a meme...
@@MalWolf01 hey, you never know! it could happen
Still i couldn't understand how you are making animations. Great job TED-ED
Hey TED-ed, this video is pretty out of date, be great if you can updated it.
1. The price on the earth and human labor of the mining of material for solar panels
2. Asking energy reduction and the question of : "what do we really need energy for"
3. Real cost of lithium batteries and their lack of decomposing / poisoning the earth.
2. Other energy alternatives ( and their impact on environmental health and public health)
Thanks,
I liked the video, but it ignores the impact that renewable energies have on the ecosystems.
I doubt that it's any worse than global warming
The way our civilization works makes all this SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO complicated to do
Going to the moon was complicated but we did it anyway
Great insight into the build just subscribed and it’s a nice compact turbine I also have built a homemade 650 watts wind turbine, a treadmill motor turbine and a little but powerful ametek 30v turbine and built 2 diy solar panels, be careful in high winds one of my first turbines blew up 😕and now have only 2 wonderful turbines working daily 😊it’s very satisfying watching those things working, keep up the good work buddy 👍
Two huge problems either touched on or ignored in this commentary: cost of building so many turbines or solar panels, and the absolute volume of raw materials needed. Both are more than prohibitive. I also noted that Nuclear, the largest supplier of emission-free, green power, wasn't mentioned, even though it can easily be configured to be a renewable energy source as well (you can produce more fuel than you consume--making it more renewable than wind and solar in absolute terms).
If we want to break dependence on fossil fuel, we have to massive increase our investment and use of nuclear energy technologies. I'd love to see TedEd talk about that.
Great video!!!
I work with alternative energies in Colombia. It's pretty hard. In spite of, we haven't advanced because government is quite corrupted.
Ww need help.
Yes sir...
Can you tell me exactly what your org. Does?
Let the actual demand take control of what we use, not politics. When the government gets involved, things fail hard.
We should look at better nuclear technologies for power, such as thorium reactors and molten salt reactors.
4th Gen Reactors MSRs
Why they are super safe.
th-cam.com/video/mXaDqRrPc_M/w-d-xo.html
we will use the oil for now, and when we have the correct solution, we switch
An issue is that methods of harvesting renewable energy are still harmful to the environment (although certainly not as bad as fossil fuels). To give a few examples, wind farms create noise pollution, take up a fair amount of space and may impact the animals living in the area negatively. Hydrodams and ocean turbines aren't great either as they can inflict great damage on the ecosystem they're placed in, with the bed of the ocean/river being disturbed and animals being misplaced, harmed or even killed. Solar power does take up space but it can also get pretty damn hot if a lot of them are placed together to create a solar farm since they were created to attract sunlight. To top it all off these sources of energy like wind and sun aren't exactly avalible all year around in most places. Great TED talk since it talks about the fact that greater economic changes need to be made with the increase of renewable energy farms.
As for stuff like Geothermal, not only is it super scarce and super expensive in non-ideal areas, but it can also cause earthquakes, which requires no explanation as to why that would be disastrous.
2:56 can power be generated?
or it is just transformed from one form of energy to another
_confused_
Yes, energy is always transformed from one form to another.
Only exception is nuclear energy, converting mass into energy respecting e=mc^2
0:40 "Fossil fuel dependence" Shows nuclear cooling towers.
What about chi? The energy that flows in the universe as shown in kung fu panda
Abundant sun and wind? Think again, these sources are totally variable.
Sun? How is that variable if you establish solar panels in multiple countries. Same with wind.
Energy return on energy invested.
Photovoltaic 1.6, biomass 3.5, Wind 3,9 they are under the economic line of 7.
Natural gas 28, coal 30 and water 35. Nuclear powerplants pressurised water reactor with solid fuel rods 75.
Dual Fluid reactor 2000
Truflame ALL we have to do is make a grid sized bedini motor but instead have a magnetic switch we use a pulse-width modulator and two coils as the prime mover and the whole system would run on say 5 solar panels maybe like 10 or 20 batteries during the day time the solar tracker would not only power of the pulse-width MODULATOR but wod charge the 20 batteries in parallel and during the night the batteries would power.
Nuclear: Please stop ignoring it.
Nuclear is the safest and cleanest.
I would say that if there's no probability in this world
Which type? There’s fusion and there’s fission. Fusion is the safer option tho.
Only problem is it takes 30 years to design and build one plant.
@@noahi.1381 I assume he means fission since fusion has not generated net positive energy
Jameel Ja takes about 40-60 months to build a power plant, there has been a halt in production of nuclear power plants for 30 years
nuclear is a thing too
Netron it's the only viable option that actually works, but people are afraid from the "nuclear Boogeyman".
What about fusion?
That's the truth sadly.. maybe if we ever work out fusion people won't be scared of that
Fusion is trying to do what the sun does but here on earth. It's a long shot, but worth it.
Here is where scientist currently are: th-cam.com/video/knrHPneSN10/w-d-xo.html
Wael Karram waste that's dangerous for millions of years is a serious hurdle. Also the expense of building them. On top of that there is the fact that the light water plants currently in use are only use 3 percent of the energy of uranium.
2:06 "It's been estimated that a surface that spans several hundred kilometers would be needed to power human at our present usage levels". Why don't we build that? Cause its impossible.
We need to figure out something what to do with snow. For areas with 4 seasons, we need a way to figure out how to use cold energy for something.
who is here for school?
A very informative video. It also encourages us to utilize solar energy at the household-level. If an entire airport (Cochin International Airport) can be fully solar-powered, atleast it can be done at smaller levels.
No mention of nuclear power?
Amusix nuclear isn't renewable
Wrong. www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/03/24/is-nuclear-power-a-renewable-or-a-sustainable-energy-source/#3451c6ef656e
Chernobyl, fukushima.... one little mistake/disaster and that city is condemned for 100,000 years. nuclear is great for energy, but the risk in my opinion is too much. I live in the uk and have solar panels (a small 4kw system) we barely have any sun but my electricity bill is halved. simple solution every home adopt solar panels with a few wind turbines and the entire city could run on renewable energy.
Amusix its an alternative energy not renewable
Are the bubbles going up or down on 4:50?
That actually works kinda like an optical illusion.
Although I think they're going up.
This was a real helpful video