Infographic – All Forms of Energy on Earth Came from the Big Bang

As a part of our ongoing quest to produce “infographics” that lay out the basics of energy, I invite you to check out the chart here, presenting the notion that all the energy we harness and use here on Earth came to us indirectly from the Big Bang. Whether we’re talking about nuclear, fossil fuels, or the many different forms of renewables, those forms of energy have been made available to us via one of four different pathways through time and space since that event 13.7 billion years ago.

Big Bang Infographic

Posted in Renewables - Science Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
29 comments on “Infographic – All Forms of Energy on Earth Came from the Big Bang
  1. jstack6 says:

    The only one that will last forever is Solar.
    It feeds the entire planet with Photosynthesis.
    It provides heat and light.
    It can be used to make electricity ,PV.
    It even creates wind with different temperatires.

    We live in a Renewable World if we just work with it.

  2. You leave out the one element that could explain it all and makes more sense than any of these theories.
    Intelligent design. God made it all.

    • anoymonus says:

      God is definately a scientist

      • Tom Parrett says:

        But his advance guard on earth can’t spell.

        • Anonymous says:

          Tom Parrett, I remember reading what Thomas Jefferson believed about uncompromised spelling (and this is a quote): “Damn a man who can spell a word only one way.”

          The thought matters more than a specific way of saying or spelling it.

    • That is one way to look at it. To me, saying God made the world is too simplistic and irresponsible of ones own actions. God made the universe, as the aincient prophets say in stories of the Bible with it’s many, many revisions, but few have bothered to ask “where?”.
      Where did He make it?
      Another way to look at it is that He made it in our minds. Yes, everything you think you see with the bodies eyes remains within the mind that believes it sees it. Gods world is beyond this one because it is the world of spirit, which gave life to the mind of man and woman. In truth, this world then, is an illusion, because everyone sees it differently, having a different vantage point, being in a different body, believing it is separate from all other beings. The True Mind of Loving Spirit is the One Mind of God. It is the real identity of everyone. It is beyond proof and facts of the world, being known only by its effects. That is why it is invulnerable and cannot be threatened by our dreams in the world. Yes, I am saying that we are living in a dream of reality in this world, dreaming of waking up, but looking in the wrong places. This idea was first introduced through ancient Buddism and spread over centuries to the middle east, where the Christian zealots perverted it via their bible, perhaps to suit their need for control of the masses, or maybe it was simply the best they could do since they were unable to view the world they valued so highly as differently. Only one thing is certain about the past. It is not here now. It is remembered by a flawed mind, being altered from the mind that only believed it saw a real thing in the first place. Being unwilling to explore “preposterous” ideas has locked the western mind into self effacing spirals of self deceit, confusion, and insanity. The split mind is one main aspect of western mind that insures it’s insane perceptions are maintained. Immense amounts of energy are invested daily in the perpetuation of this illusion. All this is done simply to keep Peace from the mind of man, which believes it is unworthy of its true Creative potential. Any questions?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Sorry, but all you’ve stated here is the fact that Earth was created by Big Bang

  4. Dale says:

    Sorry David,

    The “theories” make perfect sense without the need for storybook explanation.

  5. If you believe in the “big bang” that’s fine, but there is reason to withhold judgement on that particular bit of cosmology.

    While it is the ‘standard model,’ that bit of spin ignores the pesky fact of paradigms coming and going.

  6. Mihai Grumazescu says:

    Doesn’t help much – actually it fuels confusion in less trained minds in Physics.
    We need a very down to Earth approach in solving our energy crisis. Our problems are less theoretical and more technological.
    Keep in mind that we still have a hard time in reproducing fusion on Earth, so let’s forget about cosmology.
    I wouldn’t feel comfortable in putting my logo on such a poster…

  7. Dale says:

    The point I take away from this is that man is not unique and we depend on our environment and earth for survival.

    Thinking that something bigger is watching over us and will protect us is the perfect reason climate change doubters fail to take responsibility for the impact we are having. As the planet goes, so does man.

    In fact, its been stated than humans are the only species that have a negative impact on the planet. Remove humans and Eden returns.

    • Your last sentance is revealing. It was not any living organisms other than man that sinned against God. It is original sin that separated man from God that created all ill effects for man and all creatures under the dominion of man (all life). One key, spiritual aspect of global warming or any environmental/resource issue is stewardship. God gave man a free will to do good or otherwise. God also asks man to care for all gifts man has been blessed with in a responsible “Godly” manner, as they are all on loan to men from God. The conflict arises when subjective assessments of man’s impact on earth / resources collide with the collective “wants” of men. Some make a case that America “over-consumes” thus stressing our planet which becomes more fragile as populations increase. We are all Adam and Eve, and have shut ourselves out of Eden. There is hope however. Perhaps we should exercise our free wills to consume less.

  8. Louis says:

    With a relatively tiny investment compared to any other energy source, clean energy sources (Wind, PV, Geo, Bio) are approaching or already have lower costs than the total cost for coal, nuclear, and so on without the negative impacts on our planet. You would think this is a no brainer, but people always take longer to change than they should. There were people really against cars, planes, trains, electic light, and so on. Eventually, people will adapt to what is best for all.

  9. Manoj says:

    We have always been utilising the renewable sources of energy in various forms. Solar energy for agriculture, used for drying of food and goods, light for daytime work, etc. Wind energy for transportation, processing of grains and agriculture via windmills etc. Utilisation of fossil fuels came later and replaced most uses of renewable energy which existed.

    Renewable energy is now coming back via its converted form – electricity – and in this form it is augmenting and replacing fossil fuels. Looks like we used fossil fuels for much shorter period than renewable energy but have caused huge damage to the environment in the process.

    We need to go back to using renewable energy as mankind has done always but in the more modern form of electricity ..

  10. Craig Shields says:

    I should have made it clear that this is the scientific explanation for this, and that other explanations are possible, e.g., religious. Hybrid approaches are also possible, e.g., God created the Big Bang (and evolution, etc.).

  11. annymous says:

    The point of this diagram seems obscure and not altogether honest. All energy we can tap is part of the universe that we too are a part of. OK. Other than that, the logo seems like an anti-renewables message masquerading as the opposite. There are huge meaningful differences between all those sources of energy, and choosing the appropriate ones is important. They are not interchangeable expressions of the one big bang.

  12. So, we make the world in our own minds, based on belief and science, but accepting the view that because we see with our minds eye, we can change the identity of who we believe we are and also what we believe the world is, and what it is for. If we “choose” to believe the world is for “getting” we are forgetting, and already doomed. If we believe the mind of man, based on his thought system, is a biodynamic computer, capable of re-configuring itself, as it often does, then we can see everything differently. If we choose to be fixed onto a “sophisticated” scientific view that supposes we are an effect of this world instead of its cause, we may suffer the effects of this ignorance.
    We must be aware that we cannot have it both ways. That is the offering of the split mind. IOW, the mind cannot tolerate the belief that the world has made you at the same time that God, being Love, has anything to do with it, or that reality can change just because you are unaware of it.

  13. Tom Parrett says:

    Don’t you think it a mite preposterous that we humans, inhabitants of one planet in one solar system, on a galaxy of 100 to 300 billion stars, among hundreds of billions of galaxies, are darn sure the diety we have in mind is responsible for all this (and perhaps a lot more such as parallel universes, and universes before the Big Bang)? And that diety is molded in our own image? Just a thought.

  14. Craig Shields says:

    Someone just asked me: What do you think of Rossi’s fusion machine?

    I take grief for this, but I believe that low energy nuclear is legitimate science, though I’m not in a position to weigh in on any particular variety. If we still have a civilization here 100 years hence, I’m fairly confident that we will have developed this.

  15. Cameron Atwood says:

    Nothing will be resolved in a debate on religion.

    Here’s the key point, in my estimation: We receive 6000 times what we use, every day, from modern sunlight. It can be converted directly to electrical potential on site and in grid format, stored as heat, and used passively.

    We as a species are fools – FOOLS – not to run full speed after switching ASAP to this clean renewable source that will last a good five billion years into the future.

    • Frank Eggers says:

      Perhaps we do receive 6000 times energy we use, every day, from modern sunlight. But does knowing that do us any more good than knowing that the planet Mercury, because it is closer to the sun, receives even more energy? Some statistics, while interesting, are of no practical use. What IS of practical use, is knowing how practical it is to harness the energy we receive from the sun.

      For the for the foreseeable future, there will be situations and locations where harnessing sunlight to generate electricity makes sense and therefore work should continue to develop that technology. However, we are not using sunlight as effectively as we could.

      Using sunlight to generate electricity is very costly and, except in certain limited situations, is not cost effective. It would be more cost effective to use it for heating. Active solar systems can be used to heat homes and provide domestic hot water much more cost effectively than to generate electricity. However, using solar energy to generate electricity is much more heavily subsidized than using solar energy for heating and, because of that economic distortion, we are not using much solar energy where it would make more sense, i.e., for heating.

      Probably there is no practical substitute for nuclear, but I am convinced that our current uranium nuclear technology should be phased out; it’s too costly and making it adequately safe adds to the cost. People who are not conversant with non-uranium nuclear technology are insufficiently informed to discuss nuclear power intelligently. I suggest watching the following video:

      I have ordered the following DVD on thorium nuclear technology, but have not yet received it; I suggest that others order it also:

      http://www.amazon.com/Thorium-Remix-2011-Kirk-Sorensen/dp/B005OZVX8O

      There has been NO interchange of ideas on this site regarding this technology. I strongly suggest that people become well-informed on it so that we can intelligently discuss it. That makes more sense than rejecting nuclear power without first thoroughly studying it.

      • Craig Shields says:

        I think the significance of the “6000 times” figure is the implication that solar energy, in one form or another, is eminently doable. Having said that, you’re 100% correct that thorium has been ignored here. Here is one small attempt to rectify that: http://2greenenergy.com/thorium-reactors/17747/.

        I’m really enjoying the video you reference, btw. Thanks. The only thing I’ll mention counter to the ideas expressed therein is “solar won’t work because it only accounts for 1% of our energy.” That’s specious reasoning; it’s like saying in 1990 that the Internet won’t work because no one’s online.

        • Frank Eggers says:

          The reasoning behind the 1% figure is questionable because, without supporting evidence, it is unreasonable to assume that in itself it proves that solar won’t work is uneconomical. He should have provided information to support his conclusion which he probably could have done.

  16. greg chick says:

    Does anyone remember Suzukis “A Planet for the taking” interesting documentary that disappeared ! in mid 80’s it was an award winning Master Piece, now only a memory…..Wish I had a copy.
    Greg Chick, ramonas plumber

  17. Gec77ko says:

    With all due respect we think we know and understand all and come up with things like ‘The big bang’ to try and explain the supposed start of creation as we know it and it happened 13 odd billion years ago. Explain to me if this is the ‘truth’; How can we detect galaxies in the outer reaches of the cosmos that is further than 13 billion light years away (which would infer that light started from there more than 13 billion light years ago and only reached us now. (There are other galaxies beyond that which we can detect with other means which even further disputes the creation of the cosmos from one instance of massive energy release. We cannot comprehend Gods’ infinite power and attempt futile hypothesis such as the big bang to try and make sense of it all. If we only believe as children and stand in awe at Gods creation whilst we discover new cosmic worlds in the brilliant design – that is enough for me. One final word from me; God is so infinitely powerful that he created all we can detect just to make us consider our futile existence without him and Christ as our savior.
    “I am the way, the truth, and the life; NO MAN cometh unto the Father, BUT BY ME.” — Jesus Christ (John 14:6)

  18. asdasd says:

    is this s religious site? i thought it was about green energy and stuff…maybe i was wrong.

    • Craig Shields says:

      Ha! It’s funny, I thought this post might send some people in that direction…

    • Frank Eggers says:

      No, it’s not a religious site. However, many religious people believe that we have a responsibility towards other people and that that concern includes safe-guarding the environment. However, many non-religious people have the same concerns. There are certain issues on which both religious and non-religious people should be able to work together.

      Posting details about one’s religious beliefs could be divisive and get in the way of working together constructively. Personally, I’m more concerned about how people treat each other than I am with what they believe.

  19. Darrell Panike says:

    I deeply respect your individual right to believe as you wish, just needed to voice mine because I know and love God. No offense to any intended.

    Oh yee of little faith! Study, ponder, and pray and you will(can) learn for yourself that God’s kingdom is a place of order, and all things therein are subject his comand simply because they love him. It is there for you to see if you but open your spiritual eyes and mind to him.

    Some things require pure faith to undersatand and gain knowledge of, that is His way of filtering the tare. Without faith, there is no hope, no purpose,and no return.

    Einstine was right, there is energy in all things(mass)and I believe he understood its source. It is all in how we individualy view it I guess.

1 Pings/Trackbacks for "Infographic – All Forms of Energy on Earth Came from the Big Bang"
  1. […] ocean thermal, Renewable Energy, solar energy, Tidal Energy, wave energy, Wind Energy via 2greenenergy.com GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); […]

Download a free e-copy of Craig’s first book, a #1 best-seller in energy on Amazon.com: “Renewable Energy–Facts and Fantasies.”

Want to understand the thorny challenges in technology, economics, and politics that face the clean energy industry? Download the book.

AMAZON #1 BEST-SELLER

WHO IS CRAIG SHIELDS?