Global Warming

“I'll discuss some of your points one-by-one:

"current technology is lacking"
-------
Not entirely true. Not even considering some of the 3rd generation PV technology that's only a year or two away, current PV tech can provide all of a home's 24/7 energy needs from the sun that hits its roof during the day. Grid-tie inverters are key since they knock out the 20% loss to a battery. What is true is we still need a better way to store the energy overnight and a reserve for cloudy days. Flywheel units are being tested in CA right now, and there are some possible super-capacitors that will fill the need in the near future. Wind is also very plentiful in 2/3 of the nation and there is a crazy boom right now where big companies are putting putting up turbines faster than they can make them. Solar thermal is also mature - the same home roof can get enough heat to give you 80% of what you need on an annual basis. A slightly larger system can get you up to 100%.

"technological innovations are likely some time off"
-------
Happening every day - new PV and capacitor tech is coming as I mentioned. One lab-grade PV just broke a new record at about 33% efficiency (current tech is about 18%).

"safety issues abound"
-------
Don't understand this. Creating PV uses the same chemicals as the computer industry, since they are both processing silicon. Some of the newer PV tech uses some harsher chemicals if it catches on, but not as toxic as what coal plants put out today. And even the Audobon Society now agrees that the minor threat to birds from wind turbines is far less than what is coming out of the coal-fired plants. They now support wind.

"financing is sketchy"
-------
Only because coal, oil, nukes are getting so much tax money now. Like I said before, if PV and wind could get the kind of tax money the other stuff gets, it would be our majority producer in a few decades.

"availability is hit or miss"
-------
See the first item. All the availability is there, its really a problem with storing the extra for night and cloudy or low-wind days (depending on if the source is PV or wind).

"security is a problem"
-------
Here is one area where distributed PV and wind shines. A nuke or coal plant is a sitting duck for a terrorist attack. When you have PV or wind turbines all over the place there is no target left for them. They might take out an energy storage unit (of the future) here or there, but the grid would just draw some energy from a farther-away unit. No net damage done.

"environmental impacts are unknown"
-------
Same issue as safety.

"Nuclear energy may have its problems, but it also meets those concerns better than most pipe-dream alt-energies. It is a viable mid-term energy solution. It can be done on a global scale in the next 20-30 years"
-------
Actually it takes 10 years of planning and clearances before you can start building a nuke, then another couple of years to build it. The pool of engineers and companies that can design/build nukes has shrunk dramatically because we haven't been building them for 25 years. They are all retired. Even if we had all the materials ready to go we just wouldn't have the brain or manpower to build more than a handful of nukes. Going a step further, the amount of fuel available is relatively small compared to our total needs. If we could build out a whole nation of nukes (France is 80%, close), no one else in the world could refuel theirs. Its a finite resource, and much smaller than coal or oil ever was.

Nigal, yes, they get 80% of their power from nukes, but many are now getting old and they are turning their attention to other options for future development. Same problems as here - long development time, little skilled labor, and nuclear waste issues.”

“YAAAAWN....yeah yeah...destroy America it is the only way to save the planet....Here is an idea, go to the CHI COMS....set up a BIG demonstration in Tianamen Square DEMAND they stop DESTRUCTION (tech this is not a coffee cup on the side of the road but natural destruction on a level only seen in the Soviet UNION) ...LOL.....”

“I really wish you spoke Engrish. I truely can't understand half of what you write lately. chi coms, huh? I think I get your China reference since they are going down the same pollution path as us, but then you bring in a coffee cup, huh? I think you don't get that our mature and maturing renewable tech will directly affect the growth in India and China. Developing countries latch on to our mature tech for their growth. So if we have mature PV-with-storage in place, they will use it too. China is cracking down in a big way now on pollution since they don't want to look bad to the world at the Olympics.

And I see you still have your fingers in your ears. How does clean renewable energy "destroy America", tell me again?

You are a troll, stepping in to replace the other troll that plagued us for 1 1/2 years. Hope you enjoy it.”

“the amount of fuel available is relatively small compared to our total needs. - techntrek

I've seen such dire reports in the MSM. But uranium is not the only fissible fuel. Thorium, for instance and there's others. Plus, the newer fuel reprocessing technologies will extend supplies.

Like I said, it's a mid-term solution, not long-term.

I see some good points being made on your part, and that fits right in with nuke/alt co-development. Alt-energy is great, but dismissing nuclear is simply without base. The main obstacle to nuclear is the stubborn sociopolitical phobia in society.”

“not to mention there are such things as breeder reactors....

Most of the stuff your spouting tech is a half truth. For instance the high cost of building reactors is due to the extremely unfair tactics used by the anti-nuke crowd which forces constant redesigns during the construction phase. You constantly spout off about solar but you leave out the rather high price tag of 20-30 k it takes to power a home not to mention the cloudy day problem.

I have to wonder techntrek if your merely deceiving us or your self. Personally I would love to live in your world but Im stuck here in a reality that needs several more gigawatt size generators built in the next few years....”

“Mutt, if it weren't for the waste issue I would almost love nukes. They also aren't emission free (as claimed by the industry) since they take so much energy to mine the fuel, transport it, build the plant (LOTS of concrete and steel), and then store it all for another 30 years while the plant is decommissioned. I would look past the later stuff if the nuke waste wasn't a problem, really.


lumberjack - The high cost of building a nuke is mostly due to the "embodied energy" of all that concrete, steel and other specialty materials and equipment, plus the labor. The redesigns are a small part of it - I do software engineering and the changes made in the planning stage are very small in cost compared to later in the game.

Yes, a full installation with current tech is about 20-30K. Very true. But with the rising electric costs your payback is about 10-12 years. The system is good for another 20 years, so you then get to save another 50K. Not a bad return on investment. And there is no cloudy day problem - batteries take care of that with some restrictions today. There is some loss and they do need to be replaced every 10 years, but there ARE tens of thousands of off-grid homes that today get 95% of their needs from solar alone.

Tell me lumberjack, how many nukes did we have 50 years ago? None. There was an explosion of nukes (pun intended) because we were in the same situation 50 years ago. So we pumped millions in tax $ into the industry and within a decade had many nukes online. We could do the same today if we just diverted the tax $ into renewables. Its already starting to happen with wind, but only because its so profitable many companies are rushing into the field. New tech will fix the high cost of PV and then the same will happen through private industry. Until then, just divert the tax $, like they had to with nukes before. The situation is the same.”

“The reality is... who will underwrite them? The downside, whatever the probability may be, is quite steep (and it's a long way down).

When Westinghouse took over Savannah River Site from DuPont, both got a 'get out of jail free' card from your Uncle Sam. That's the only way Westinghouse would come in. I'll bet the Capt. read all about it in Billy's fishwrapper. If he was here at the time he would have. It was big news.

Neither company will ever be held liable for anything that happens... long term or short. Can the civilian power generators get the same deal for the new plants they'd like to build?

The industry will want their usual subsidies, like they've always gotten before. Funny how they beat their chests about how The Free Market Will Decide... (but we want our subsidies, By God!) No hypocracy There!

So those are just the NORMAL problems we used to debate.

Now consider the whistleblowers reporting over the last few years how lax security has been --- not good with those Islamo-Fascists hiding under ever rock.”

“"techntrek, I'm not sure I'm going to trust any info from that anti-nuke site."

Yet Mutt freely uses Wikpedia as a source.

-groan-”

“All I know is it's gonna be in the high 40s at Red River Gorge this weekend.

Viva La Global Warming!!!”

“"All I know is it's gonna be in the high 40s at Red River Gorge this weekend.

Viva La Global Warming!!!”
Nigal"

All I know is that it 10 crisp degrees right now, and loving it....

BTW -- That should be "Viva El Nino" -- we start the cycle this year, thus the warmer temps.
last edited: 1/25/07 7:31:59 PM”

“WOW...I am guessing the ZPG (Zero Population Growth) crowd will be lurching off the End Global Warming bandwagon shortly here.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T2X-4MV71C2-1&_user=777686&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000043031&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=777686&md5=30dc7fda0cf2ed6cd676fe99048ba4c0”

“I lean closer towards the ZPG (Zero Population Growth) crowd than to the Anti-Nuke or even business as usual Fossil Fuels. Surging population growth especially in places where education is lacking is a grave global threat. Overpopulation leads to poverty, starvation and war. It is however an easy problem to solve. After my two kids it only took a 1/2 hour outpatient procedure to FIX.”

“Population is in. We, with out restriction, are importing it. The war on poverty, like all 'the wars on, is a total failure. Of all the war on, we are only winning two; the war against the common american citizen and the war against the environment
last edited: 1/26/07 8:44:49 AM”

“with a 100.00 / month electric bill, payback is a minimum 17 years for a 20k system. 25 years for a 30k system which would require repair as well delaying pay back to 30 + years...

never ever believe a salesmans figures...

wind power figures are about the same. Hydro is a lot cheaper and better developed if you have access to the head pressure needed.

I have to agree the long term problem is population. Time to clean out the gene pool I guess.


The redesigns are a small part of it - I do software engineering and the changes made in the planning stage are very small in cost compared to later in the game

and after construction started is exactly when the anti nuke people would file injunctions and force the builder to literally tear down the plant and start again more then doubling the construction cost. By the time a company actually gets the plant built 90% of its expenditures went to court challenges and mid construction design changes. Some of the anti-nuke fanatics have gone so far as to sabotage reactors forcing 24hr security even during the most basic stages of construction. Nuke plants are cheap, its dealing with the fanatics that have driven the costs beyond what the power companies are willing to pay.

keep your PV, I prefer to bask in the glow of our local nuke plant.

:}”

“"with a 100.00 / month electric bill, payback is a minimum 17 years for a 20k system. 25 years for a 30k system which would require repair as well delaying pay back to 30 + years..." - lumberjack

And you didn't read a key part of what I said. "With the rising electric costs." If I were still paying the $.06 kWh I was paying last year, I agree that financially (but not environmentally of course) it would make no sense to invest that kind of money for a near breakeven payback. But electric is rising sharply, partly due to peak oil and peak gas. Now I pay $.11, and I expect over the next 10 years for that to double (so do many other "experts" in the field). With those kind of numbers plugged into your equation, a 10 to 12 year payback is at hand.”

“"But electric is rising sharply, partly due to peak oil and peak gas."

My per kilowatt hour just jumped 50%. I haven't called yet, but if Peak Oil is the song and dance, it just doesn't wash. There are many centuries worth of coal just in America alone. While not all of it is top shelf stuff, we're set as far as that goes.

It more like the oil thing, where people paying the futures drive up the cost of resources. They'll cite anything they can to make a buck off the backs of the consumer.”

“Got iodine?”

“Hey Tilt...how many of the five reactors at Savannah River Site are operational?”

“Good question. Not much demand for more nukes at the moment. I think all five(?) are shut down.

(IIRC, there was a graphite-cooled reactor there as well, speaking of which)

I hear the quantities of liquid high level waste in undergound tanks are Large and long-lived in the extreme (plutonium). It's the ground water that I wonder about.


And you didn't answer my question on the 'MAT' thread.”

“The very origin of nukes are the sun- go to the source. we are just men , we are not DEVO. that's d... e... v....


...o.”

“$4.99 at buycostumes.com ...”

“i agree with stove. the cartoon figure in his comic strip is a hip black conservative who always trumps the silly white libbie, automatically giving him "street cred"”

“So says the white boy that thinks he's hip enough to use a variant of the "N" word that young Blacks like to use in the 'hood. ;-)”

“im not hip, im caustically ironic”

“Don't let reality interfere with your cartoon world view.”

“To me the best path is energy diversity. This includes nuclear and it includes renewable energy sources - and it includes conservation measures ("a watt saved is a watt produced" to update Benjamin). This is good for energy independence, for the environment, for national security and the economy. There are some places where it makes great sense to have nukes and some where it's not the best option. I'm a little wary of corn subsidies for ethanol - because there is a lot of oil that goes into growing corn and making ethanol.

As for global warming - the trends are undeniable. The future of the trends is not known... nor is the exact mix of causes. There is reason to be concerned, but I don't think anyone can knows exactly what the contribution from human activity is, what the consequences will be, what self correcting mechanisms there might be and what if any the tipping poinr would be.

I think we need to demand sane, far sighted policies from everyone. In my state (Massachusetts), Senator Kennedy opposes wind farms in Nantucket sound because it would ruin the view for some of the rich folks who own homes on the Cape and the Islands. He's probably too entrenched to pressure, but I will definitely gripe at him (of course, I did call and #&%!$ at his campaign once when someone put Kennedy signs on my fence once without my permission - a trick Mitt Romney's campain tried once as well).”

“I heard that there's a YouTube from a year ago that demonstrates where Romney has reversed himself on three or four issues to appeal to the more conservative end of the spectrum. It's no 'Macaca Moment' by any means, but something that might prove interesting, nonetheless.


I'd feel better about nuclear power if they had a more trustworthy past. It's not the sort of thing to cut corners with. Waste is also an issue for me... and with Harry Reid as Majority Leader the outlook for Yucca Mountain is certainly less rosey. (ha)”

“Don't let reality interfere with your cartoon world view.”
tilttiltblam
2:28:07 PM
1/28/07

Please say that the next time we see one of Violin's (or Gary Trudeau's) boring cartoons.”

“doonesbury can be rather dry, but give me that over the lame-duck "humor" of mallard fillmore”

“1) You do know that I wasn't only speaking literally. The main thrust wasn't literal at all.

2) If I were to behave as you suggest in the context you suggest I would more than likely have to lie, based on what I know to be true.

3) If you want to morph these exchanges into more of the same US v. THEM #&%!$ that goes on around here that would be a shame.”

“If your reply was to my post, I am aware you weren't speaking literally.
Otherwise, I'm not really clear on your other two points. I'm not sure what context you are referring to in point 2. And I don't think one can honestly say that I engage in the US v. THEM back and forth arguments.


If you were talking to someone else, ignore this.”

“Let's take another run at 2 and 3.

2) If I followed your suggestion and said what some other person posted was crap I'd be lying... again, based on what I know to be true. A more extreme example would be if I said, "Hey Stick, why don't you send a letter to your congressman and demand that Bush be impeached for his criminal acts?" I believe that would be somewhat antithetical to your general outlook.

3) Suggesting that I comment on someone else's posts with whom you disagree is pretty snarky. It IS engaging in Us v. Them. I'm not saying that you have engaged in this to any degree that I've seen... until that last post. (I try to avoid Tag Team Wrasslin' in real life, also.)

If you think comments are in order You make them. Don't ask me to.



If I think something is crap, you'll probably read about it --- unless it's a worthless troll doing that worthless trolling thing that they do --- in that case I try to ignore it, and them. Not always successfully, but we try.”

“Tilt, are you trying (and failing) to sound academic, or do you simply lack the skills necessary to be concise and readable?”

“I gotta agree there is global climate change but the same people who predict it say they cannot predict the weather more than 72 hours with any accuracy.

My question is this. If a professional makes a suggestion and it turns out to be terribly wrong....there are consequences. So lets say we go ahead and cripple the US economy (so the "Don't wanna try to be successful" crowd can feel better) then 10 years down the road we find it was NOT MAN. What is the response?

This is the thing, the libbies want us to do stuff in a "PANIC RUSH EMERGENCY" mode (hell look at all the CLEENTON emergencies) but when we discover it was nothing (or there was nothing we could do) they just sorta WALK AWAY..no biggie, "our bad"...i.e. NO responsibilty.”

“Why do so many people think that doing things right would cripple the economy?

"Restructuring the global economy according to the principles of ecology represents the greatest investment opportunity in history," says Lester Brown, President of the Earth Policy Institute, in his book "Plan B 2.0.". In scale, the Environmental Revolution is comparable to the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions that preceded it."

http://www.enn.com/net.html?id=1799
last edited: 1/29/07 7:57:37 AM”

“RIIIGHT...lets look at it again troll, check out the Kyoto Treaty...the only nation really kicked is...THE US. Not China, not India...the US.

Come on...play the "I'd love to buy the World a Coke" crapp..somewhere else.”

“Kyoto has nothing to do with the impending eco-catastrophe. The U.S., China, India, the 3rd. World, everywhere is opportunity to build a cleaner, safer world.

Doing things right does not only refer to atmospheric emissions.

I suppose, XL, you feel we should still have raw sewage running in the gutters.
last edited: 1/29/07 8:14:45 AM”

“Las Vegas is'nt a huge camp fire in the southern Nevada desert, that has been burning 24-7-365 and being stoked to a flame beyond belief and for what? Even a fireman should know, we can't see the stars for guidance when the valley is full of smoke.”

“hillsidedigger, no matter what you say to XL he can't hear you. I've presented proof that individuals can improve their energy use (and therefore reduce their emissions), while also contributing positively to the US economy. But he still thinks we are headed back to the stone age. Poor guy, can't hear the symphony for the fingers in his ears.

salebored, good point about Las Vegas. Gets all its water from distance sources and consumes enourmous amounts of electricity just to light up the main strip and run all those machines. That one's going to implode one day, a la "The Stand".”

“If a pig farmer limits access to the trough for the larger hogs , he'll never bring home the blue ribbon from the Fair. What is fair?”

“Self-reliance. Invest some of that gambling revenue into water generators. The latest tech can draw water from even low-humidy desert air (the first round of this tech is supposed to be a big boon for water-starved African countries, IF big supporters step in to foot the bill). They have all the sun they need for PV, so they need to plow some $ into that, too. Daytime offset of peak usage would be a great start.”

“Ferris Wheel, livestock show (Beauty Pageants for Methane Production Units),
arts & crafts contest, Bearded Lady, the Wild Mouse, haunted house, two-headed
fetal pig in a pickle jar, talent show, petting zoo and of course,



the ”

“The dying gas hog industry could well be converted to a value added giant. Imagine news of that at an OPEC meeting. Maybe Nixons' 55mph and 55mpg instead of 95mph at 1 gpm.”

“Las Vegas: hideous eyesore to those who value dark skies.

Have you ever seen a program "The Other Grand Canyon"(?). It's about the Black Canyon, just upstream, now underwater and rapidly filling with silt.”

“Yes -- much better all around: mpg vs. gpm.”

“Let the river bed rise- we don't need no stinking sand paper, we got dullboozers.”

“That'll suppress some science if the whitehouse is a bunch of libbies.”