Living greener

[Alex]

Support a massive push into developing nuclear power.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Support a massive push into developing nuclear power.

I used to believe as many did and many still do, that all we really needed was workable nuclear fusion (not fission) and all our energy worries would be over.

Now I think that's a pipe dream, at least in our lifetimes. If fusion ever works at all it will be so expensive to create a plant that it will leave us right back at the hands of big corporations who will set the price per/kilowatt as they see fit.

They technology I'm banking on is fuel cells powered by Hydrogen created from solar cells on my roof. Right now all the pieces are in place to use this technology to create all the energy I need to run my house and cars except one. The solar cells that use light energy to efficiency separate hydrogen out of water. Right now that technology works, but it's only effective in the ultraviolet range of light. As soon as that range can be moved down to visible light (where 90% of the suns energy is) then we are in business. There is some promising research in that area going on right now.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

I used to believe as many did and many still do, that all we really needed was workable nuclear fusion (not fission) and all our energy worries would be over.

Now I think that's a pipe dream, at least in our lifetimes.

I think Alex meant conventional nuclear power. In many ways it is cleaner than other power plants.

But I'm with you on the personal solar power thing. At least in places like sunny CA, it's become a real alternative.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

I think Alex meant conventional nuclear power. In many ways it is cleaner than other power plants.

Conventional nuclear power or fusion, the same argment applies. It's too much a big busines enterprise.

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

But I'm with you on the personal solar power thing. At least in places like sunny CA, it's become a real alternative.

Note: What I'm looking for is not solar power. It's fuel cell power that just uses sunlight to separate out the hydrogen. It is much more efficient than direct solar and thus is (or will hopefully be) practical in a much wider swath of the planet.

[Alex]

Personally, I think fuel cells are the pipe dream that has derailed sensible discussion into alternative fuels.

And I don't care about big business providing the power I'd just prefer we move from sources of power that destroy the environment by design to a source of power that only does significant damage to the environment by accident.

There's a guy in New Jersey that uses solar power to provide all of the electricity he needs for his home. He then uses the excess solar power for electrolysis to power fuel cells that run his home and car through the long winter when sunshine is rare and its energy reduced. To store enough hydrogen to power his fuel cells for 3 1/2 months required 10 1,000 gallon tanks. Fortunately he has 12 acres of land on which to put all of these solar panels and gas tanks.

In most urban and suburban areas this simply wouldn't work without massive infrastructural redesigns. For example, in my apartment complex the buildings and landscaping have been designed to minimize solar exposure so as to minimize the need to use air conditioning during the hot summers. The roofs are pretty steeply sloped so that at any time less than half has sun exposure. The property is dotted with tall leafy trees that further block the sun. To get much use out of solar panels all of the buildings would have to be reroofed and a lot of trees would have to be cut down.

Yes, fuel cell technology will probably become more efficient but we're orders of magnitude away from where the average person in any but the most perpetually sunny environments can easily become completely self sufficient as an energy producer. Nor would most be willing to take the time and trouble of installation and maintenance (solar panels require constant cleaning and large gas tanks exist in a rather onerous regulatory environment).

Asking everybody to become responsible for producing their own electricity is kind of like asking everybody to grow their own corn. It may be a good idea in principle but it simply isn't going to happen. Better then, in my opinion, to focus on converting the existing electrical grid into something that isn't designed to pump tons of particulate into the air every day.

That's not to say I don't support individual use of solar energy and fuel cells. I just don't seem them as a panacea to the structural problems in our we actually supply electricty.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Personally, I think fuel cells are the pipe dream that has derailed sensible discussion into alternative fuels.

How can you justify calling fuel cells a pipe dream? They have been used successfully as far back as the Apollo program. They are currently used in business around the world to great effect. Did you think they were just for cars?

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

And I don't care about big business providing the power I'd just prefer we move from sources of power that destroy the environment by design to a source of power that only does significant damage to the environment by accident.

There will still be a need for big business energy, I don't say self generated power is for everyone, I just want it for me and large numbers of my fellow earth dwellers.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

There's a guy in New Jersey that uses solar power to provide all of the electricity he needs for his home. He then uses the excess solar power for electrolysis to power fuel cells that run his home and car through the long winter when sunshine is rare and its energy reduced. To store enough hydrogen to power his fuel cells for 3 1/2 months required 10 1,000 gallon tanks. Fortunately he has 12 acres of land on which to put all of these solar panels and gas tanks.

Actually you mean there is a guy in New Jersey that wants to provide electricity for his home. He is not currently producing any Hydrogen. His problem with the 10-1,000 gallon tanks is NOT the fuel cell, it's the generation of the Hydrogen. If you will look back to my first post on this issue, you will see that I clearly state that currently the missing part of the solar-to-hydrogen-to-fuel cell equation is the technology to efficiently separate out hydrogen from water using the energy found in the visible part of the spectrum. Your New Jersey friend with his expensive "Electrolyzer" for generating hydrogen is definitely old school. It's inefficient and slow. You will note that his 10 takes are all low pressure which is why he needs so many. Why are they low pressure? Because under his plan he does not get enough energy to run a pump to pressurize the gas. So in short this guy is barking up the wrong tree but it's not the fault of the fuel cell, it's the current gas extraction technology limit that's the problem.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

In most urban and suburban areas this simply wouldn't work without massive infrastructural redesigns. For example....,

Again, you are stuck thinking about current technology for gas extraction. You don't need acres of solar cells if you have even a 10 percent performance level direct solar to hydrogen process

Will everyone generate their own power? Of course not. Your typical office tower or factory will not be able to create it's own energy. Am I saying we should only focus on hydrogen generation? No. However it is a technology that could go a very long way towards solving our energy needs in a clean environment friendly way.

[Alex]

Fuel cells are not a pipe dream. Widespread individual use of the fuel cells and energy production is, in my opinion, the pipe dream.

Like I said, I'm all for it for anybody willing to go to the trouble has my full support. But I just don't see it as a significant source of relief for the current problems with our electrical generation.

I'm also not saying that a resumption of nuclear development will solve all of the problems, but they are solutions in different realms. Hydroelectric is pretty much overdeveloped in this country. People aren't going to like what they see if we make any attempt to fully develop solar and wind energy (though I generally support efforts to do so) and it is only irrational fear that keeps us from using nuclear.

But the improved solar generation you want is probably still a decade or more away (and has been promised as being "just a decade away" for the last 30 years) and even then only a small minority of people have both the space and the willingness (let alone "Los Angeles light conditions") to do it.

Rather than reducing demand for coal-fired electricity (which is all that would happen, best case, with individual generation) I'd rather convert the coal-fire to nuclear as well.

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

You will note that his 10 takes are all low pressure which is why he needs so many. Why are they low pressure? Because under his plan he does not get enough energy to run a pump to pressurize the gas. So in short this guy is barking up the wrong tree but it's not the fault of the fuel cell, it's the current gas extraction technology limit that's the problem.

Moonie,

I know you follow this the way I do, so I wanted to be sure you saw this new high pressure electrolysis and storage system.

The system unveiled at Chewonki uses renewable power — from solar panels atop the center and purchases of "green" electricity — to produce hydrogen from water through a process known as electrolysis. New technology that produces the gas at high pressure eliminates the need for a costly compressor.

Developers of the system said it's the nation's first publicly accessible direct high-pressure hydrogen energy system as well as the first complete hydrogen energy system in Maine.

From Yahoo News