The “green economy” is a fashionable economic opportunity that is mainly framed in the political discourse. Renewable, efficient energy sources and environmental protection are listed among its themes. Since those themes also have scientific implications that transcend economic policies, perhaps, it might be interesting to try and size some purely scientific issues.
To address a specific point, I wonder whether “efficiency” and “environmental impact” boil down to replacing fossil fuels with solar, wind, nuclear, …, energy in general, or whether the above words also mean that the conversion efficiency can be adjusted so that each type of power consumer is supplied by an adequate type of source. Joule, Rankine, Kelvin, and others reasoned that only the production of motive power matters, such as the motive power of chemical action, for example, and ventured into the determination of the mechanical equivalent of heat. Is the current task of dealing with conversion efficiency compatible with energy conservation? Or else, when having in mind to match the available sources to various different purposes is there a need to revise the concept of energy?
Hi,
for me it is clear that energetics development could/should be coupled with individual (person) development.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Communications (Networks)
- Simulators