Renewable Delusion?

"Green" energy is intended to address both peak oil and climate change.  But the development of renewable energy itself still depends on fossil fuels.  And there's a lot of faith put into the expectation that a technological breakthrough will "save" us.  In addition to the blog that explains it all better than I ever could, Tim Smedley also points out the questions involved with laboratory discoveries.

Thorium-powered nuclear fission, bio-gas from micro-algae, giant fuel cells, kinetic energy from piezo technology, using water salt gradients for pressure-retarded osmosis: these are all potential future energy sources. The problem, according to Professor John Loughhead, executive director of The UK Energy Research Centre is “how much of it do you want and how much are you prepared to pay for it?”

[M]any scientists believe that the energy revolution will not come from science or technology at all. “You’ve got a combination of technological suitability, the structure and nature of the energy market, and user and stakeholder acceptance – the three interact to shape what does and doesn’t happen,” says Professor William Gale, director of the Energy Research Institute at the University of Leeds.

Update (August 25):  Katherine Boehrer describes a new type of transparent solar collector. It's hard to argue new technology shouldn't be developed, but their are still questions about efficiency and what it would take to scale up to a level that would matter.

Update (September 4):  Peter Diamandis has an optimistic view of solar energy.  Again there is great potential, but also limiting factors.

Update (November 22):  Almuth Ernsting gives a sobering overview of the carbon impact of renewable energy technologies and calls for a transition to a low energy society.  Gail Tverberg discusses eight pitfalls of renewable energy and notes that green solutions only allow us to avoid the limits of a finite world a little longer.