I can think of a number of reasons -
1. Our energy demands are seriously increasing all the time - not just individuals or nations, but globally. If in 50-100 years we have several billion people no longer living in hovels but electrically powered homes - greenhouse gases might be the least of our concerns. Everyone on the planet will be contributing to heating it. EVERY form of energy we use has one thing in common - they all dissipate HEAT.
2. Unless technology seriously improves - most of the renewables we're talking about now won't cut it. You can't have wind power when the wind isn't blowing and you can't have solar when the sun isn't shining. You can't dam up every river without injury to the environment.
3. Worse - none of our current forms of renewables don't come at a significant cost. With solar - even with perfect translation of solar power into electricity - you're going to run out of space. Ditto windmills. What happens when you wipe out all of the accessible land? And we need more? They also - with the materials we're currently using - have a comparatively short shelf life with diminishing returns. It's not JUST that solar panels wear out after say, 25 to 30 years - they don't generate as much power as they did at first.
STILL the most efficient model is to find a way to distribute a fuel SOURCE. Electricity is not a fuel source - it's a product of fuel. Batteries store energy, they don't create it. Unless we find a way to say, create small fusion reactors a la LENR - which I think is probably never going to happen - the best short term solution is going to be to find a way to capture all of the gases and particulates released from energy creation.
Because we have too many people on the planet to revert to 19th century horse and buggy and wood fires for heat.
www.kerrydougherty.com
