No Miracles Needed

Great book if you want to learn how tech is already available for renewable energy and it sire already being applied globally. Shows the science and reasoning why renewable energy sources make sense.

I'm on page 13 & already feel like an expert! Pretty easy read so far. Lots of facts to breeze through to get a basic understanding of exactly what needs to change where, what the problems are and why. Can you imagine if everybody read this book & grasped the science & understanding in a real way. Empowering in that it gives you the facts without the social political side. I think a technical Republican would enjoy this book because it's the facts, & the explanation of the facts without a lot of opinion & bossiness. Highly recommend. Do I get a Stanford degree when I get through the whole thing?

I'm glad I read it, but this book is both thrilling and disappointing at the same time. Educated in physics and experienced in project engineering and management, I was hoping for more. To start, the text is NOT an easy read, because it needs serious editing, linguistically and for typos. It gets worse further in. Is it evil to suspect that some of the text came from classroom handouts? The illustrations/ tables are also rather clunky. Figure 8.1 especially is a mess: Edward Tufte would not approve. I agree with others that the "My Journey" chapter should have been at front as a preface. I tend to read the back sections of books before starting Chapter 1, so I had a sense of what was coming; but that was my luck in terms of knowing how the author's story got him to a position where he could challenge sacred cows in the energy industries. The excursions into basic physics may help some readers, but the book is not consistent: why explain diagrammatically the PV effect and the principles of motors but not, say, heat pumps? The discussion of hydro power also seems uneven: that only 3% of dams have hydropower facilities sounds like an opportunity - except that this statistic is misleading if most dams are very small and the big ones are already producing power. Also hard to believe that building several thousand pumped storage facilities (the number that Jacobson implies that the world needs) is going to happen quickly. The energy capture from regenerative braking cannot really "extend range substantially", especially if hybrids are considered (which the text does not discuss versus full EVs): per journey, much more fuel goes to pushing a vehicle through the air than in getting it up to speed. "Hauling all those batteries around to save money", in an IC car, has always been suspect to me. (And check the prices and weights of the BMW PHEVs!). More urgently, recent news about particles thrown off from large tires on heavy electric vehicles, and the damage caused to roads, gives pause: this is about normal rolling resistance and tire loads, not just braking. Choosing the author's own house as an example of heat conserving design is fair enough, but why not add some more examples from Scandinavia or even Amory Lovins banana-growing house at 8000' elevation in Colorado? Speaking of whom, Amory's 1976 article is far from his only contribution, never mind the Rocky Mountain Institute that he founded. In particular, Mr. Lovins has championed insulation efficiency, which is a simple technology whose installation does not need the higher training levels of plumbers, electricians and programmers. As such, Jacobson could have highlighted it as a "no-miracle" approach that, according to Lovins, could make a huge impact. I'd also like to know the relative insulation value of wood framing of houses versus Jacobson's steel framing - never mind the issues such as resourcing of materials AND labor for using steel rather than wood construction in millions of homes. Jacobson says his house only uses 2 of the 4 installed batteries, which hints at a permitting issue. Whoa - what went wrong here? An example of bureaucratic resistance? - that is a pertinent story to tell. There is discussion of transformer tech, and a possible move to iron-nitride magnets for generation, but the latter - not commercialized yet - sounds like a bit of a miracle. Also, the space given to the story of Tesla versus Edison just seems off. This history really does not affect the choices we now have, where both AC and DC have their place. Another area needing emphasis is the way in which time-of-use pricing meets reality for the power utilities. "Vehicle-to-grid" power contributions should have great value, as also load shedding (made less onerous for owners if dwellings are better insulated, so they cool or heat more slowly when the power is off). But the utilities have time horizons much longer than home owners, so balancing the needs of both side of this equation is tricky. Consider what happens if millions of home owners have Nest thermostats that load shed at a digitally-precise 3pm. Meantime, my particular 'smart' thermostat is not on my utility's list of supported devices, so I'm SOL to help their load shedding. As these devices proliferate, the regulation - and programming - problems grow worse. My biggest concern for WWS is the need to completely rework the grid. This is going to need lots of copper. Does the world have enough? And what about the labor and training of engineering and technical resources, and the changes in regulation required? Changing one line in the Electrical or Mechanical Code can take a complete 3 year revision cycle: that model of regulation surely won't support the rate of change required to get all these technology upgrades past Town Hall. The book has a rich set of references, even if a lot of Jacobson's own work is listed, but many interesting statements throughout the book do not have sources quoted. Another frustration. The timing and extent of the climate disaster requires new thinking from all of us. "No Miracles" is a good critique of some of society's boxed thinking and resistance, and invites a clearer-headed awareness of the opportunity costs of nuclear, carbon capture, "natural" gas, etc.. However, this work is actually a textbook disguised as popular science. It contributes much as a conversation starter, but desperately needs a 2nd edition if it is to make it into the pantheon of climate adaptation.

The author and his team have obviously created a complex model of energy production and consumption alternatives, and used it to identify a combination, or multiple combinations, of alternatives that will meet the objective of 80 percent solar, wind, and water renewables by 2035, and 100 percent by 2050. My mentor as a graduate student in environmental engineering taught that "Public sector modeling need to be thinking made public." Unfortunately, in the public sector decision-making process for energy policy, the author has not taken that step. It is very easy to reach a foregone conclusion if you make simple adjustments to model parameters and assumptions that may not be true. If these adjustments and assumptions are not well documented, it brings the whole effort into question. Specific questions I have relate to the feasibility of implementing many of the component of his energy 'solution' in the time frame stated. Hydrogen fuel cells for long distance trucking? Where does that green hydrogen come from, and how is it distributed? The necessary upgrades to the electric grid? What is the availability (now and in the near future) of the materials required (especially copper) to produce the necessary transmission and production upgrades? Air transport energized by fuel cells and batteries? IMHO, the energy density of those options makes it unlikely. No need for nuclear power as baseline supply? How do we store enough energy from renewables to make up for the baseline power? Also, the multiple years-long time delay between project conception and completion does not appear to be recognized for many of the components of the solar, wind, and water 'solution'. I think it would be safe to assume that every major project, no matter what the long-term environmental benefits, would be opposed in a permitting battle because of an endangered species or a unique historical or geological feature at or near the location. Meeting energy needs in rural areas is also a subject that has not been well addressed. How would farmers meet the challenges of their occupation without using diesel fuel? Modern farm equipment is huge. It can't be driven to a fast charge station when needed, and many fields are remote from even 220v power. A charger capable of quickly charging the equivalent of a 400 horsepower tractor, or a 690 horsepower grain harvester would be something to behold. If the equipment is fueled by green hydrogen, what does the supply chain look like from hydrogen production to that equipment in a remote field?

If you want to understand how renewable energy--solar, wind and batteries IS the future, read, no study, this book! Debunks all the false diversions like carbon capture, expensive and slow to build nuclear, natural gas as a bridge. Should be required reading.

Mi meraviglia che un professore della Stanford University scriva un libro inutile come questo a sostegno di una tesi così importante.Sono solo banalità senza il minimo supporto di un numero a sostegno della tesi .Il miracolo è davvero necessario.Giorgio scanavacca

Clearly written, comprehensive review of how the world can transition to zero carbon, wind, water and solar energy, saving millions of lives annually, the casualties of current air pollution from fossil fuel burning. And of course saving the climate from devastating heating which will destroy most of the world's agriculture in a few decades under 'buiness as usual'. The wartime scale investment needed for transition will provide a major stimulus to all economies, generating close to full employment for the first (peace)- time in history. Essential reading for all politicians and voters.

A handbook for ditchling fossil fuels with detailed descriptions of all the existing technologies that can today (2023) make that happen. And a useful resource to give detailed answers to those who say ‘but what happens if the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine’.

Bought this as it sounded a great call to arms peice but it's so badly written it's hard to get into it. It's basically got the structure of an academic book but they've dumbed it down, so you're left with a hard to read mess which feels condensending at times. The editor should be taken out and shot

Very important book for everybody, including policymakers, to read. Everybody needs to understand the content of this book.