|spikestoyiu - 2010-06-07 |
We need energy, just as long as it's not any of that hippie shit like solar or wind or water (fucking hippie Hoover dam.)
The problem with the green alternatives at present is scale.
"What would it take to substitute wind for offshore oil? At 5.8 MBtu heat value in a barrel of oil and 3412 BTU in a kWh, 1.7 mbpd is equivalent to 2.9 billion kWh per day, or 1,059 billion kWh a year. By comparison, total 2008 wind generation was 14.23 billion kWh in Texas, and 5.42 billion kWh in California.
Therefore, to replace our offshore oil with wind, you’d need 195 Californias, or 74 Texases of wind"
Environmentalists who are serious about reducing emissions and the potential for these sorts of disasters are pushing for ramping up nuclear power as fast as possible, and using shale gas as an interim solution to reduce coal and oil use. That's European environmentalists. In America we have BANANAs (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).
See also: It’s Green Against Green In Mojave Desert Solar Battle
I'd hate to be the only logical person in this train wreck of a discussion, but I for one want to see the human race survive and I want to see it improve and last a long time. No one is going to save us from ourselves, so why don't we save us from ourselves?
As for wind, wind isn't the best alternative, but solar is. They are working on nanotechnology as we speak to improve efficiency of solar panels by 500% within the next 10 years, and the Sun is the largest source of energy we have. We'd be foolish not to put up a very large solar farm in Nevada or somewhere out West where there is little environmental risk.
Nuclear is a good option for now - but we can't drive our cars on nuclear energy. We'll still have to use oil - and the best way to make sure we have plenty of oil for the next few generations is to CONSERVE it.
We frankly don't have the reserves on our own soil to produce the oil we need, and drilling more just puts it out on the open market. We can't drill here and say that the oil we drill is only going to be used for US consumption. It's a fungible good. Even if we do increase offshore drilling, it would only give us about 2 - 3% more oil.
The way to make oil last is to not use so much of it. How? Because 71% of our oil consumption is through transportation. Only a small fraction of it is used for energy and even a smaller fraction than that is used for manufacturing. If we shifted most of our freight to rail and used trucks for local shipments only - we would reduce our consumption through transportation enormously. If we improved passenger rail such that high speed rail was throughout the entire US and through all major populated corridors, it would reduce the need for any domenstic air travel and long distance driving - which reduces consumption further. Add in metro transit and your reduce the need for commuting every day to work in major cities.
By those changes above, you could knock down 2/3 of the consumption that we use for transportation and we wouldn't have to worry about drilling more.
We can't get away from the manufacture of goods that require petroleum - but with recycling and conservation we will be alright.
Once you move most of transportation and energy production off of oil, you will have solved the oil problem for the US.
Wait, I feel like my sarcasm was not detected by at least one person in this discussion. I figured the article would have sealed it, but I guess not.
If solar can be used to power plug-in hybrids, so can nuclear, at lower expense given current solar costs. Also, as far as I can tell, the best solar option at present is utility scale solar thermal with storage. Heat up some sodium in a tower or parabolic trough system and use it to turn turbines all night long.
As an aside, there's probably serious returns to be made in mass producing compressed natural gas conversion kits for the existing transport fleet over the next decade. At present, these cost k, 5k installed, but that's an artifact of boutique engineering and small production runs. The U.S. has booked a LOT of natural gas reserves in shale plays in the last 4 years.
Solar Panels do not like extreme temperatures. Generally speaking their efficiency drops by %0.5 for every degree over 25 C; keep in mind that the panels themselves regularly get much hotter than the ambient air. While I understand the desire to utilize desert space in Nevada, I don't believe the panels would produce as much energy (or last nearly as long) as they would if placed in a more temperate environment.
This is just talking about conventional panels, I have no idea how HCPVs work. I've heard some people talk building some solar thermal power plants in the desert, and I think solar towers look bitchin'.
There's been a lot of annoying bloggers around here lately who'd rather have a serious discussion than make jokes, so they have to take jokes seriously or they'll never find their in. Kinda harshing my buzz, honestly.
Camonk, I realize your desire to turn off your 'thinkin' brain' and just laugh at fart jokes, but Poe has always been a site where there are jokes AND there is serious discussion. I'm sorry that you don't like it, but there are sites like 4chan which might be able to accommodate you.
I do see how solar panels could operate hybrids, but battery technology isn't to the level where electronic cars will have a large enough range to be used for any real distance driving. Hybrids will still need gasoline and oil.
As for Nevada, there are parts of the state that don't get that hot due to the elevation and could still be used. While southern parts of NV are getting around 110F today, northern parts are only getting into the low 70s for highs. Plus, there's a lot of open land out there and we might as well use it for something.
I'm sure there are huge parts of Nevada where one could effectively place solar farms, but what from what I've read the most effective way to implement solar power is not by building huge farms, but rather by paneling houses and neighborhoods. Producing small amounts of energy locally, rather than huge amounts of energy which then has to be transported along power lines (losing energy along the trip). I think solar energy is a great way to supplement grid power (hopefully allowing us to shut down some coal plants) but I haven't come across anything that has convinced me that large solar farms are the way to go. But, reading your first post, I don't even think you were asserting that, so this is more or less just me rambling at this point.
Well, I mean, you're all random internet people. Do you know anything about energy? I don't know. Not like I can take your word for it.
Also, most of you wittering on and on in your nearly wordspot-worthy posts are pretty boring and annoying. I guess that's the main thing.
Read a blog, tear apart that treadmill you will never use, and build a wind turbine. Civilization is going to collapse before corporate cunts switch to alternative energy. It's either doom or every energy requiring human for themself.
Am I an official thinkfag now?
Humans lived for 200,000 years without electrical power. Just reduce breeding until population levels allow for that again. Problem solved.
On the subject of current battery capacity, and electric cars. There are ways to get around the problem. A tank of gas only goes so far, so we stop and fill up. Since batteries are also potentially one of the most expensive components of an electric car, the price is also an obstacle. Swap stations would solve these problems.
Swap stations would be very much like gas stations in that you stop in, you get refueled and you leave. Where they would be different is that where a gas station sells you a commodity, swap stations would be leasing their commodity. A driver would not own the battery in their car, but would lease one from a swap station, when the vehicle needs more power, the driver would lease a fresh battery from a swap station owned by the same company leaving the depleted one to be charged and redistributed.
Also by, 'next few years' i mean like 15 years.
|tmavomodry - 2010-06-07 |
I bet the GOP really thought they had hit on something "hip" and winningly irreverent when they came up with that retarded chant.
|Camonk - 2010-06-07 |
Fuck everyone whose voice I hear in this video. Fuck them to hell.
I "mine, baby, mine" because I assume they mean it as they're just claiming everything.
|standard8mm - 2010-06-07 |
I like the Sun, it gives off a great source of energy. Even the wind. Even ocean tides. Man. Wow, penis in the butt to oil after this...
|chumbucket - 2010-06-07 |
it's elaborate energy ideas such as these that make the conservative voice relevant
|Ocyrus - 2010-06-07 |
1:27 "Now is when you chant "Drill, Baby, Drill!".
I love how political followers need to be herded.
|kennydra - 2010-06-07 |
it made me cry.
|FABIO - 2010-06-07 |
This could have been done a lot better.
|Colonel Cowlung - 2010-06-07 |
Would like to see it incorporated with this one:
|Xero - 2010-06-07 |
I take full responsibility for that shit turning into a boring debate. Camonk was right. Let's just stick with funny. I'd rather look at these videos as evidence that the small portion of rational people in this world are fucked and laugh.
|kingarthur - 2010-06-07 |
Spoken with all the emotional conviction of people who vote Republican and live nowhere near a coastline.
|Cena_mark - 2010-06-08 |
Despite this tragedy we still need oil. Drill baby drill, but lets be a bit more careful this time.
are you CRAZY, oil is made of dead dinosaurs haven't you SEEN jurassic park?!
|Rodents of Unusual Size - 2010-06-13 |
well now I feel like vomiting.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|