Roger B said:

Renewable energy sources require a lot of resources.

But then, so do non-renewables.  How much coal does a coal-fired power station burn through in its lifetime?

Be a little careful, that quote is not saying that "extraction and processing of material resources for renewable technologies" is responsible for those losses (i.e. if we cancel renewable plans those losses will stop), these losses appear to be from all extraction activities. The source of this quote here https://www.empa.ch/web/s604/world-resources-forum-2023 is slightly but not much clearer.

But yes, carbon emission reduction is bloomin' complicated. The trick is proper emission lifecycle analysis, fortunately there are now lots of people who are very good at this, next step is to get them listened to!

Hi Mr. Andy,

The world is moving to electric vehicles at a fast pace, but even the garages that install them do not have enough in-depth knowledge on the matter.

I would like to inquire whether Empa’s collaborations with certain fossil fuel companies could have any influence on its research agenda. Empa is a research institute that focuses on applied materials sciences and technology, and it receives most of its funding from the Swiss government. However, it also has various industrial partners, some of which are involved in fossil fuel production or consumption, such as Shell, BP, Total, ABB, Siemens, and others. Could this pose a potential conflict of interest or bias for Empa?

Some interesting responses.

I agree that fossil fuels are too valuable as feedstocks just to burn for energy. There may be some less usable fractions/byproducts that can be burnt. The petrochemical industry will always be needed. Wind turbines and EVs will require lubrication, plastic insulation, paint, bitumen for the roads etc.

I hope that this study will bring the real amount of resources consumed by renewables. Typically the numbers, if you can find them, stop at the terminals of the wind/solar farm. Interconnections, back up sources, etc. are ignored.

I think EMPA will be fairly unbiased, Siemens and ABB certainly have a large business interest in promoting grid scale renewables.

This appears just to be concentrating on the resource requirements for the ‘Green Transition’ whatever that is exactly. The comparison between wind, solar and nuclear resource requirements will be interesting.

Not quite sure I agree with that Roger.  There was an article in IET magazine recently which pointed out that despite all the greenwash that only 10% of the plastic waste actually gets recycled after several sorting's and repacking's for exporting at huge cost to obtain carbon credits or otherwise just landfilled.  This is extremely wasteful of time and transport costs.

Because all hydrocarbons are full of energy which could easily be reclaimed by burning in a power station why not recycle the 90% remaining plastic waste in UK and any other wood or other flammable waste products that are in our recycle bins.  We need the energy to generate electricity and could scrub out toxics from the chimneys. 

No sorting costs and minimum transport/ handling as delivered direct to local power plant/incinerator where metal and glass objects can be removed and reprocessed before burning and reclaiming all that otherwise wasted energy..  

That is mostly done here (Switzerland) already:

(1) There's gold in that rubbish - Engineering Discussions - IET EngX - IET EngX (theiet.org)

Hi Roger,

We are all proud of the beautiful nature. Wherever we live, scenic green areas and health trails are within walking distance of our home. We all want our health and that of our loved ones to be strong, so that the prices for the necessary goods and services remain reasonable, so that there is enough electricity for both factories and houses and apartments. So new works that already today we feel the impact of climate change: the climate is becoming more unstable, storms are intensifying, summers have become drier and hotter and winters have warmed on average, but, on the other hand, they present surprises in the form of heavy snow. We are already feeling the negative impact of climate change today, and if nothing is done, it will increasingly threaten our normal living conditions, nature and even the security of our food supply. We see how dependence on fossil fuels increases electricity bills, not to mention its negative environmental impact and its use as a tool for international influence.

We consume natural resources too intensively and unwisely, thus causing their deterioration and producing a lot of waste. In doing so, we endanger the future of the economy and the well-being of future generations. The solution is to move towards a circular economy, to create everything necessary for life, using as few resources as possible. This will allow us to be more competitive, achieve sustainable economic growth and create new jobs.

We love nature and want health and well-being. But climate change and fossil fuels harm our environment and economy. We need a circular economy that reduces waste and uses resources wisely. This can save costs, lower emissions, boost innovation, and improve welfare. But it is hard to change our system, mindset, and behavior. We face challenges like lack of awareness, incentives, infrastructure, and collaboration. We need to act at different levels and scales to overcome them. We can raise awareness, make policies, invest in technology, and foster cooperation. This is my view on the circular economy. What do you think?