Reply
Thu 27 Nov, 2003 01:26 pm
Big everything is bad. There may be an occasional exception, but
they generally are not in international corporations, government,
unions, nor not for profit organizations. Some of the
alternatives to oil would likely be closer to operational if we
had thrown more money at the research and pilot programs. I've
looked at the details of most of them, and some real stumbling
blocks remain as near as I can tell.
I agree superconductors are an important key. I have not seen
any details recently but apparently the nitrogen temperature
superconductors cannot tolerate strong magnetic fields, are
expensive to make, difficult to utilize and not reliable in
finished products and important applications. Dry ice temperature
superconductors have hardly gotten mention yet.
Our stupid government has scaled back the helium subsidies, so
there is not enough helium to build a national electric grid,
cooled by helium temperature super-conductors. Neon cooled would
be too costly and hydrogen cooled is a significant fire hazard
that can crash the electric grid.
Without superconductors even local grids lose 20% the energy,
and half is not unusual when the energy is sent 200 kilometers or
more to a distant city where the energy is needed. Until, and if,
we can install superconductors we should be thinking self
sufficient villages and neighborhoods. This has big advantages in
case of terrorists, and massive grid failures.
I suggest the following as a pilot project for solar. Purchase
about six square kilometers in a sunny location at an attractive
price. Build 3 solar power towers in optimum locations spaced
about one kilometer apart. We need about 1000 of another kind of
tower. The large steerable mirrors are one to a tower (similar to
cell phone towers) We build residential homes (mostly 1 story)
with streets and other conveniences that don't interfere with the
beam of solar energy being sent to the solar power towers. As the
day progresses some of the mirrors will serve all 3 towers. More
towers would make for better utilization. The sale of building
lots will recover the initial land purchase, plus part of the
cost of the 3 solar power towers, which will provide the
neighborhood power needs late morning and early afternoon unless
it is cloudy, or December in the North temperate zone.
At night plus perhaps two hours, electricity will need to come from
somewhere else so we must not put present power companies out of
business. Some energy storage may be practical to provide power
during peak demand which is typically close to sunset. Electric
power is typically cheap and in excess after about 9 PM, so the
power towers should shut down until morning, then restart one at a time the next morning beginning about sunrise.
The mirrors can send some extra light where needed when the beam
cannot reach an operational power tower. This may be helpful for
lawns and flower gardens, or just to brighten a gloomy day. Even
small yards will typically have a tower holding a steerable
mirror, and tall trees will not be permitted in most locations. I
don't think there are any important disadvantages to the
residents, and they can be proud that they are helping reduce oil
dependence. Neil
The oil producers will NEVER allow an alternative energy source to reach viability, unless they control it.
Hydrogen is the most viable alternative to oil. Hydrogen-gas crossbreed cars are already on the market. There might be a day when we go all hydrogen. It is a completely attainable goal. It is not so much the oil producers afar that the USA is at war with but the local auto industry, which has enormous political influence. However, especially now, if more people pipe up, they will eventually have to cave in. It has started, but needs to be finished.
hydrogen fuel cell automobiles are in prototype NOW
Companies in US are producing working (they look simply COOL and work marvelously - those I saw on TV a month ago, btw) prototypes now too, and here is a good little link:
http://www.fuelcells.org/fct/index.htm
btw, the cost to consumer right now would be about $32-35,000 USD (one on TV program, a month ago) - but prices will go way down with mass production, and that no doubt depends on the number of companies producing these vehicles worldwide. Chrysler, GM, and Ford have their companies working on each of their own, I believe - all top secret right now (of course, eh?)
Since natural gas is the "best" place to extract hydrogen to fuel these engines, and Russia has 80% of the known world reserves, guess who is now "friends" with USA? (wink, wink)
Cheers everyone,
Stephen P.
Neil,
I recently traveled to a wind farm near Davis WV. I was IMPRESSED. I think that they are going to pan out if interest rates stay low enough. This problem of an unstable currency has done more messing up of alternative power sources than almost anything else. The costs of capital have more to do with the type of power we are using than anything else.
The mirror plant technology has been around for over fifty years. It does work. Same with wind power, some is working today.
Wilso,
Big oil and big coal and big power all are responsive to the bottom line. The minute that it becomes more profitable to sell you wind power or mirror plant power then we will get it. Currently a wind power company cannot finance competively to a "fossil"fuel plant.
In the US some companies are using wood to make electricity, some coal, some wind, some natural gas,some oil, some photoelectrics. some geo thermal, and some with biomass fermentation. There are also pilot ocean wave generating facilities.
In short you do not need conspiracy theories to explain economics although there probably some of those involved also. I think that the conspiracies are mostly of the collusion between untrustworthy politicians and the MBAs who are charged with operating profitable companies. (If it's cheaper to buy a politician than to install pollution technology then the pol gets the money. C'est la vie. No conspiracy, just practical business.
There's no problem producing an engine that runs on hydrogen, it's the power required to produce the hydrogen. Until a method that doesn't require huge amounts of energy to produce the stuff in the first place, then it's not really an alternative power source. I have seen a discovery channel show about a man who claims to have come up with the answer, and I saw the demonstration, but I believe he is meeting some resistance. I wonder why that may be????
The alternative is already here. Its just having the political will to bite the bullet and implement it. But the current American administration prefers to use bullets in other ways to ensure America controls the dwindling reserves of oil and gas. It is shameful, and I'm ashamed Britain is assisting in this monstrous crime against the planet and its people.
Neil, You may want to search "neg-micon"
There is quite a lot of information on alternative energy scources both on that site and the related ones that you will be directed to. Worth it.
Particularly vis-vis conspiracy theories
We already have power sources that are better than oil. Ocean wave power, hydrogen from water, certain bacteria and fungi that do wierd things, and others that are still in the works. The only stumbling block is risk and big corporations.
Sheep
We don't have anything better than oil at the moment. Oil is wonderful stuff. It squirts out of the ground, it is easily transportable, it has a high thermal energy, and forms the feedstock for many other useful products. The profligate use of oil in the US supports the high standard of living. Moreover the hydrogen economy is still decades away, but global warming, and ironically peak oil production is with us now. The demand for oil is growing but supply is falling. CO2 levels are rising, but George Bush seems to think thats a problem for the rest of the world. I don't think we will make it through to the promised land of the hydrogen economy from carbon neutral energy sources (hydrogen is only a means of transporting energy, not an energy source in itself) without a very bumpy ride. Until America starts paying for its oil, instead of just printing dollars, things will get worse. I wont feel optimistic until I hear an American President announce that gasoline will have to rise to $10/gal.
Hi sheep: Welcome to able2know. I wish you were correct, but I fear the nay sayers are correct. Alternative energy won't earn a profit even if the government (or other) matches dollar for dollar. Free hydrogen is rare in Earth's biosphere, so energy must be used to separate hydrogen from other elements such as the oxygen in water. Many locals do have a surplus of electricity for a few hours after midnight, when it might be possible to produce the hydrogen from water for about the equivalent cost of gasoline. If we get lots of solar electricity, another surplus of electricity will occur from noon to 2 pm most sunny days when we can make some more competitive hydrogen. Perhaps 1% of the world's energy can be from hydrogen, so we need 99 other 1% alternative energy methods.
We need to amend international Maritime Law before we can do much with wave and tide energy, and some sea creatures will die and breeding grounds will be compromised. Salt water is very corrosive and even modest annual storms change coast lines and damage energy harvesting facilities. Even if someone matches dollars including legal fees and punitive damage awards, I think a profit is unlikely.
I will look at the zero point energy again, and cold fusion, but I expect to find them not yet ready to respond to big grants, perhaps never. Neil
Neil,
IMO you fail to take economics seriously enough.
Coal and other fossil fuels can only get more expensive. Same with nuclear. At some point in time photo electrics, wind, tidal and direct solar will become more economical. At that time, and I leave it for the economic pundits to try to determine when, we will convert to the alternatives.
The alternatives also include smaller cars, better insulation, more recycling and perhaps less centralized manufactureing.
Edible packaging, and concentrated foods will also appear when Earths capacities become strained, OR when you begin to tap peoples wallets a little harder.
I have a lot of faith in Adam Smith and also in Maltheus.
Nothing will work as well as oil except the sun shining through giant crystals.
But, the scientist Buckminister Fuller's suggestion that the triangle supports the most weight, as in bridge building, met with deaf ears. What can we expect? Any day now, someone will recall a suggestion (can't remember just who rt. now) to move large and/or heavy objects underground, using magnetic compulsion.
Hi tex: Can you give us more details? Do giant crystals have dimensions such as one mile? Are they made of quartz glass or something else. If humans move under ground we can save a lot of energy on heating for sure and air conditioning if we are careful not to produce much waste heat, but that does not seem to be what you are suggesting? Neil
These are inventions mentioned over the years that just sorta stuck in my craw.
Supposedly, all energy on the ancient continent of Atlantis was provided by a giant crystal but I don't recall any particular size. They traveled around locally in what you might call personal cars, small cars floating about two feet off ground.
No, people won't be moved by magnetic propulsion (fast beyond belief) but heavy equipment or materials now being carried by train or the huge, huge trucks & vans warping our highways. Through underground tunnels.
Maybe none of us will be around when these things come about, but one can think and hope for humanity.
Get a grip you guys...giant crystals, Atlantis levitating cars...I thought this was a thread on alternative energy sources not alternatives to thinking.
The fact is we are all hydrocarbon junkies. And we are getting more numerous as countries like China expand their economies. We wont kick the habit whilst the stuff is still around, but what will happen when increasing demand meets diminishing supply - made worse by political instability in oil producing regions of the world is anyone's guess.
I think the USA could even use its military muscle to secure and protect its vital sources of imported crude oil.
Er sorry, wrong tense. The USA has demonstrated that it is prepared to use its military... :wink:
This is NOT my bailiwick, but I would like to ask some questions:
What was the production problem with the Stanley Steamer?
Why was the Tucker car not accepted?
Was the DeLorean not viable?
What happened to solar power as an alternative source of energy?
Re Stanley Steamer,
Not so much production problems but the long warm up time or the need to keep it warm when not being used. Naturally it would freeze and break if not kept warm. Also when a boiler blew it was spectacular, particularly if it happened in your garage or even in your neighborhood.
The Tucker was not adequetly marketed, nor was it greatly superior. There were a lot of car companies that failed and not all of the failures were the result of poor engineering.
The DeLorean was intended as a niche auto. Mr. DeLorean also had some personal problems that may have contributed to the demise of his company. Ferrari, deTomaso and Maserati are very tough competition in a very limited market. Please note that Jaguar is now a division of Ford Motor Company and that Damlier Benz (Mercedes Benz) and Chrysler are now one company.
Solar is still here. Problems are now mostly a question of economics but thats improving. You may wish to check out the wares of the many purveyers of PE (Photo Electrics) on the web.
Also for some nice literature and photos search Allegheny Electric and wind power on the web. I mentioned earlier the windmills are impressive.
Also search "Neg-Micron". They manufacture and install wind powered generators. Lots of interesting info there. I have visited the "wind farm" near Thomas WV. Hopeful to say the least.
Thanks, Smithy. The Stanley brothers took their first run down here in Daytona Beach. I understand they almost became airborne.
Hi aka: I renamed this alternative energy 1. So far there is only a little duplication of the details.
The price of oil and gasoline has not increased as fast as the price of food, medication, clothing, services and a bunch of other things, so the future fast run up of oil and coal may not occur for another decade in the USA. I agree it is all but certain sometime in the 21 st century. I also agree we need to fund alternate energy research and development now. Unfortunaty few polititians look farther than 6 years, and corporate leaders typically can see no farther than the next quarter.
Those of us pushing for action need to study what is possible. A few billion dollar efforts that produced energy at 1000 times the cost of gasoline will make it very difficult to find funding for better ideas that may come in a few years. Neil
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace