The Future of Energy

[alkalien]

Alk: don't worry you wont piss me off. i don't get emotional over internet posters..

25k is the tip of the berg for a uaw worker. that is not even salary. leave out legacy costs and its still roughly 35k.


i just think you have been fed a load of crap about the wages for auto workers in this country.

our "poor" are pretty well off compared to alot of other countries.

30 hour work weeks,4 weeks paid vacation and retirement at 45 are luxuries we don't have but then again our collapse is slower than greece so there is that...

If you say so I will believe you! I just can name numbers from books and those I learned over here. I haven't worked or managed working in the States so who am I to question you numbers.

Besides taxes and more flexibel hire there is of course the savings on shipping those heavy cars you buy over the oceans.

The greek collabse was bound to happen. They have a very small group of people sharing political and economical power amongst themselfs. They fucked the country pretty bad for their own benefit. That's what drives those people who will have to pay for that on the streets. I really can feel them.

The difference is, the greek collabse the european union will be able to pay for. Give it a few weeks and there will be plans to help them standing on their own feet soon. I'm sure the EU will help the Greek to build up their economy again, just like the US did with the german economy after WW2.

 

[Frozenguy]

Hey Frozen,

i gave it a long thought, your points are absolutly valid!

As for the newly build reactors, I was talking about those being build at the moment and that's 0 for the US. Quite some time since the last one was build too.

The freezing rivers are the problem yes. One should think that they did take that into consideration upon planning one...


My main point in this post should be that I doubt humans are able to drive a reaktor safely. All major desasters have been caused by people not taking security serious enough. And I don't think they will ever do. All accidents happened because some circumstances occured that had not been predicted. But you can only take events into consideration you predicted...

Chernobyl or Tschernobyl blew up because they didn't want to postpone a test although the reactor did not behave like it should have. They didn't want to be critized by their superiours and they didn't want to loose money.

Three Miles Island, I count that as a Super GAU because nobody knows why the core did not break the bottom of the containment, was almost blown up because somebody did not pay attention working on a valve. When the shit hit the fan, nobody knew the valve wasn't in the state it should had been.

Finally Fukushima should have been made more though withstanding earthquakes. It failed when the earthquake took place. The wave was just inconvenient for the repair. Earthquakes that strong are known from the history of that area but building reactors strong enough is expensives so they accepted the risk. I have to add, the faked the inspection reports on those plants as well.

My conclusion is drastic and sad but I fear that allways when security issues meet people who want to make money they'll decide to make more money and take the risk. And as long as the owners keep giving as much money to political parties as they do, there will be no strict policies to enforce security.

A small look at german reactors seems to proof my point. None of our reactors can withstand the crash of an airplane. I allways though well, how big is the chance of that happening? But it can happen, especially since they like to place the plants near to airports and that's where most planes crash.

Would you bet your life on everybody in an reactor doing the right thing? Would you bet your life on nothing unforseen happening to an reactor? Well that's what you do and you not only bet your life, you bet those of all your sibblings as well....

Yeah thats true, I just read my other post and realized I had meant to clarify that the 14 weren't being built as of yet..

In response to the bold, no I would not.

 

[dagnabit]

there is talk the EU wont survive.

my thought is the EU will become stronger as this collapse (global) worsens.

austerity measures will sweep through europe as (relatively) more stable economies are tapped to prop up unstable ones like greece.

more dependent on the EU to prop them up the recipients of the "handouts" will find their loyalties shift from the sovereign to the EU

hopefully we can avoid the pitfall of an AU here..
but to the OT as oil becomes more and more scarce and we remain unwilling to tap into indigenous sources(or even refine our own) the prospect becomes more evident we will head down the AU road.

 

[Frozenguy]

I read that GE nixed recommendations by their three-member panel over the Fukashima reactors design. Wet containment vessels are safer than dry but costs more money. All three panel members resigned in 1967, protesting the prototype.

I also read that the major problem was the tsunami itself. The power supplies for the cooling systems were located in the basements of the reactor buildings. The backup generators were 60s technology and were submerged in seawater.

I read that Germany plans to nix their nuclear program altogether. To do this they'll have to rely on alternatives even more. But Germany got us to the moon. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Germany leads the green-energy revolution.

Yeah.. It's amazing to think what people think they can get away with.. I read that story about the GE workers as well. Wish I knew everything that went on between them and corporate.

I'm just simply amazed at the chance people give to mother nature/human error to take over a nuclear power plant..

It's part of the reason I had started studying nuclear engineering; I wanted to design a safe one. But I came to realize passions elsewhere so that idea is on hold for now but recently its been heating up in the back of head. Personally I think I could design a rather safe reactor. I think many people can if they reroute their priorities to reactor safety.
Except as it's been pointed out, engineers do not run the show; that is left to money hungry fools that make profit priority number 1, power generation priority number 2, and safety priority number 3 (if we are that lucky).

 

[Frozenguy]

I'm rooting for you guys! It's too bad that American energy executives have corrupted the politicization of alternatives to the point that half the country thinks green energy is a ploy, not a solution.

We have educated pundits and lawmakers who refuse to believe the scientific community. IMHO, they're not that dumb, they're just compromised by think-tank contributions and political campaign donations. These pundits and lawmakers howl at deficits and claim ambitions to reign in federal government.

But these same folks brought us the war on terror. Federal government won't be any smaller, it'll be more police-state.

Well, carbon credits? I think that is a big fucking joke.. I personally think crap like that is a ploy.. Like global warming because of increased CO2 emissions? I find that to be a joke..

Pollution and waste from production, manufacturing, and use of products today is not a joke to me. And green isn't always green. I know there are ways to do this or that, but the production/destruction of most PV panels is not "environmentally safe" or green. The use and gain is, sure.

And then the cost of batteries for some of these programs..

But renewables do have their place here. We need them to balance out our environmental impact.

 

[Frozenguy]

there is talk the EU wont survive.

my thought is the EU will become stronger as this collapse (global) worsens.

austerity measures will sweep through europe as (relatively) more stable economies are tapped to prop up unstable ones like greece.

more dependent on the EU to prop them up the recipients of the "handouts" will find their loyalties shift from the sovereign to the EU

hopefully we can avoid the pitfall of an AU here..
but to the OT as oil becomes more and more scarce and we remain unwilling to tap into indigenous sources(or even refine our own) the prospect becomes more evident we will head down the AU road.

Or just invade Iran. There is enough oil in Iraq and Iran (~ $$24 trillion at todays prices if calculations are correct) to cover our financial asses and then some to push back into the lead again.

Personally I think it's a plan for the greedy, for the incompetent.
We (our politicians and ignorant Americans) got ourselves into this mess, so we should get ourselves out without infringing on the rights of other sovereign nations.

 

[TLoft13]

We have multiple, unlimited sources of renewable energy. We just haven't advanced the scale of harnessing required to rely on single mechanism.

Solar, wind, tidal, geothermal all have the potential to end dependency on carbon. It's the practical applications that need to advance in order to make fewer solutions scalable.

IMO, conservation... one of our strongest real-time opportunities has always been in our back pocket. However, conservation doesn't jibe with American conservatives. Ain't that special.

Though you have such a BIG potential, wastefull as you are now. I worked on a "Passivehouse" last year, it's absolutly energy neutral as far as heating goes. Price difference to a normal(for american standard it would be propably a well insulated one) house: 20.000 euros. Compare this to the paperbox of an american standard home, which must the be heated and cooled like crazy.... the potential is gigantic.

 

[TLoft13]

That is difficult to read. No one should have to worry about their children or themselves playing on our wonderful playground Earth. Makes me rethink my support of nuclear power.. But my faith in it's potential keeps me from turning my back..

Consider what would happen if we got a worst-case scenario in France or Germany for example, huge swathes of land immediatly toxic beyond believe, imagine possibly 10s of millions of sick and dying refugess swarming the rest of the continent. Or the possibility that a nuclear plant at the border blows up, but mainly damages another country... Imho it would make the worst of WW2 look like a picnic, the fear and confusion alone would kill people on an unbeliaveble scale. Imho we should use nuclear power only on a research level, situated in places like Siberia or so, were there is low population.

 

[Aeroguerilla]

Future in energy. I would have to say bloom energy a branch off silicon valley has got the right idea. Ive been hounding them to test a residential unit on my offgrid home. a fuel cell the size of your hand that will power your whole home and emit co2.

 

[TLoft13]

I think the problem for us at moment is the ridicolous role the big banks play. How can it be that german taxpayers hat to bailout german banks who bought bonds of US housing credits with billions and where did all this money go? How can it be that big banks by greek credits with like 30% interest well knowing that the risk is pretty high and then when the risk kicks in they can sell their faulty credits to the taxpayers?

I understand the war on the streets in Greece and other european countries! Even if they are as hard as in you picture! How can it be that I work all day and then have to bailout companies that make billions?!?

That is no european problem on the other hand...

I have to suggest Helmut Creutz "The money syndrom" again, you will also find a 30minute summary on youtube( in german or english). This man is a fucking genius and i'm sure we'll live to see him recognized as such.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Well, carbon credits? I think that is a big fucking joke.. I personally think crap like that is a ploy.. Like global warming because of increased CO2 emissions? I find that to be a joke..

Pollution and waste from production, manufacturing, and use of products today is not a joke to me. And green isn't always green. I know there are ways to do this or that, but the production/destruction of most PV panels is not "environmentally safe" or green. The use and gain is, sure.

And then the cost of batteries for some of these programs..

But renewables do have their place here. We need them to balance out our environmental impact.

Caps are government regulation. Credits are market trades that are allowed by government. Caps reduce emissions the same way we reduced ozone depletion. The ozone isn't repaired but the hole isn't as big as it was 30 years ago. We're on the right track.

Credits were created to placate commerce. The mere fact that industry's ability to ramp up modernization isn't homogenous means credits allow businesses to lean toward modernization through financing (over time.) Anybody that suggests credits are a ploy doesn't understand the mechanism.

Industrial polluters are dragged kicking and screaming to the improvement table every time they threaten the environment. It's no different today than is was 30 years ago. Lobbyists swore the markets would collapse yet we removed the majority of lead from gasoline, the majority of solid particulate from coal and we've minimized CFCs that wrecked our ozone layer in the atmosphere. Those are just the big ones. There are more cap and trade examples that corporate influence didn't infect the perceptions of the general public.

The difference today? It's a democrat conspiracy. Corporate influence has persuaded half the electorate that their special interests are our best ones. This isn't possible when it comes to industrialized commerce on global scale.

 

[SpasticGramps]

The greek collabse was bound to happen. They have a very small group of people sharing political and economical power amongst themselfs. They fucked the country pretty bad for their own benefit. That's what drives those people who will have to pay for that on the streets. I really can feel them.

Sounds just like the US and almost every other western country for that matter. Except our proles are too busy watching Nancy Grace to get into the streets. That will change.

The difference is, the greek collabse the european union will be able to pay for. Give it a few weeks and there will be plans to help them standing on their own feet soon. I'm sure the EU will help the Greek to build up their economy again, just like the US did with the german economy after WW2.

The EU will not be able to pay for it. Not only do you have Greece collapsing. Italy bonds are now junk. Portugal's bonds are almost junk. Ireland is collapsing. Spain is right behind them. No one can save the EU especially not an insolvent ECB (European Central Bank) which is chasing insolvent paper with printed money (just like Bernanke is doing). The entire European banking system is finished. Totally insolvent. That's not to say they won't extend and pretend until the last prole wakes up with nothing.

Germany is really the only country in half decent shape. They will get sucked into the black hole along with everyone else though. Their is no escaping the black hole debt vortex that is sucking the western world to their demise.

 

[Frozenguy]

Future in energy. I would have to say bloom energy a branch off silicon valley has got the right idea. Ive been hounding them to test a residential unit on my offgrid home. a fuel cell the size of your hand that will power your whole home and emit co2.

You still have to be hooked up to the grid for gas, or at least have a storage tank on site for fossil fuel. Nevertheless, an awesome technology and a definite upgrade to the various options out there; even if it is a bit pricey right now.

Consider what would happen if we got a worst-case scenario in France or Germany for example, huge swathes of land immediatly toxic beyond believe, imagine possibly 10s of millions of sick and dying refugess swarming the rest of the continent. Or the possibility that a nuclear plant at the border blows up, but mainly damages another country... Imho it would make the worst of WW2 look like a picnic, the fear and confusion alone would kill people on an unbeliaveble scale. Imho we should use nuclear power only on a research level, situated in places like Siberia or so, were there is low population.

Yeah I agree. Our current state of nuclear technology isn't acceptable. But in my opinion, we will need a form of nuclear power to continue the growth of our species. Considering I'm thinking about space exploration and building up habitats on this planet.

At the very least we should have research facilities, as you said in remote locations, so that we can harness the potential of fusion. Once we start extracting He-3 from the moon, things will change. With fusion, we can enter a new industrial revolution, one the earth has never seen before. He-3 is clean, so we need to continue developing the technologies that can utilize that fuel. So that when we invest the huge amount to get the fuel, we can put it to beneficial use right away. Clean fusion would benefit the entire world, spanning to the farthest reaches.. In my opinion.

But yeah I'll add again that I'm not satisfied with the risk we put ourselves at with this mess..
Especially when we have people we are supposed to be able to trust (NRC, etc.) and they fail us. It's a substandard system all around it seems.

 

[alkalien]

Well, carbon credits? I think that is a big fucking joke.. I personally think crap like that is a ploy.. Like global warming because of increased CO2 emissions? I find that to be a joke..

Pollution and waste from production, manufacturing, and use of products today is not a joke to me. And green isn't always green. I know there are ways to do this or that, but the production/destruction of most PV panels is not "environmentally safe" or green. The use and gain is, sure.

And then the cost of batteries for some of these programs..

But renewables do have their place here. We need them to balance out our environmental impact.

The funny thing is, although I consider myself to be a green kind of guy, my thinking, my will to protect nature all of that, I am absolutly with you on that one as well! Sure we produce too much CO2 and we should think about how to reduce the amount but I can't believe this to be a proble for the earth and nature at all. Sure climate is getting warmer but our impact on this is not very big in my eyes.

Climate has been changing for the last couple of hundret million years. It's the coldest and the time with the least CO2 in the athmosphere the earth has ever witnessed. Perhaps we, the people, will get into problems with a warmer world but the earth surely will not. As far as I know events like the explosion of mt. McKinley have warmed the earth more than people have in all the time we are here. Same with the earthquake in Japan, it moved the whole Islands of Japan 2m. How much energy do you need for that?

But that's no reason not to use ernergysources that are everywhere at hardly any costs. Besides, if norther african contries could deliver europe with cheap solar energy they could make quite some sustainable money...

 

[dagnabit]

Biomass energy production.

What place should it have in "the future of energy"?
I also remember talks about a trash/biomass "turbine" for a rural county in northwest Florida before I left... Wonder ifin they ever went anywhere?

 

[devilgoob]

first page. he is right it's "condensed"

e=mc2 what else?

It's obvious energy will come from fusion in the future.

Why argue about anything else? Law of conservation of energy, you take from the sun, but when you take from the earth its expelling eventually outward and losing it.

Resources are the key right now. Later it will be technique and very very little resource.




One thing I can't understand it why they havent coordinated a parabolic reflecting system where wherever it points it makes energy we absorb in something that absorbs waves and turns it into heat and heats water. As in beta decaying because of the higher energy state not because you heat the water with light.

You may be thinking steam, but it's what heats the steam!

Make armour to protect yourself and what do you get....armour you can invade another country with....

pfft. humans.

 

[Frozenguy]

Biomass energy production.

What place should it have in "the future of energy"?
I also remember talks about a trash/biomass "turbine" for a rural county in northwest Florida before I left... Wonder ifin they ever went anywhere?

If I'm thinking what you're thinking, those are pretty cool. And as much as I have read into them, I like them..

Evolving methane gas from a land fill to power a turbine..

http://www.ncgreenpower.org/types/landfill_methane.html

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Nissan works on recharging Leaf with solar power


YURI KAGEYAMA | July 11, 2011 01:06 AM EST |

YOKOHAMA, Japan — Japanese automaker Nissan is testing a super-green way to recharge its Leaf electric vehicle using solar power, part of a broader drive to improve electricity storage systems.

Nissan's Leaf went on sale late last year, but the automaker is looking ahead to about five years time when aging Leaf vehicles may offer alternative business opportunities in using their lithium-ion batteries as a storage place for electricity.

Nissan Motor Corp. acknowledges that, once the Leaf catches on, a flood of used batteries could result as the life span of a battery is longer than an electric vehicle's.

Electricity generation and storage are drawing attention in Japan after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami caused massive blackouts in the country's northeast. A nuclear power plant that went into meltdown, Fukushima Dai-ichi, after backup generators were destroyed by the tsunami, is also renewing fears about a power crunch.

In the new charging system, demonstrated to reporters Monday, electricity is generated through 488 solar cells installed on the roof of the Nissan headquarters building in Yokohama, southwest of Tokyo.

Four batteries from the Leaf had been placed in a box in a cellar-like part of the building, and store the electricity generated from the solar cells, which is enough to fully charge 1,800 Leaf vehicles a year, according to Nissan.

Although interest is growing in renewable energy such as solar and wind power, a major challenge is the storage of electricity, which remains expensive without a breakthrough in battery technology.

Such interest is likely to keep growing in Japan because of fears about the safety of nuclear power. The Hamaoka nuclear plant is being shut down because of such concerns, and more may follow.

Other Japanese automakers, such as Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co., are working on similar projects, such as linking hybrids with solar-equipped homes as part of energy-efficient communities called "smart grids."

Electric vehicles produce no pollution or global-warming gases but need electricity, whose production mostly relies on polluting oil or gas.

Even after a Leaf is ready to be scrapped, its battery is likely to have 80 percent of its capacity. On the plus side, the Leaf with its high-capacity battery can store the equivalent of two days of household electricity use, Nissan said.

"What's important for Nissan is to show solutions through EVs, step by step," said Corporate Vice President Hideaki Watanabe.

A joint venture with Sumitomo Corp. called 4R Energy Corp. plans to offer eletricity storage systems like the one at Nissan headquarters for business and public facilities as a commercial product by 2016.

Nissan also hopes to start selling such storage systems for regular homes by the fiscal year starting in April 2012. It will carry out field tests from December, 4R Energy President Takashi Sakagami said.
___
Yuri Kageyama can be reached at http://twitter.com/yurikageyama

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20110711/as-japan-nissan/

 

[headseed]

solar roads and thorium reactors and we're set for lyfe yo

Solar Roadways: The Prototype

LFTR in 10 Minutes - Thorium Remix 2009

 

[Suspect]

Power from the Air: Device Captures Ambient Electromagnetic Energy to Drive Small Electronic Devices
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110707131545.htm