![]() |
€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides. |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
ohhhh baby
|
Quote:
But I'm with you on the personal solar power thing. At least in places like sunny CA, it's become a real alternative.
__________________
The second star to the right shines in the night for you |
|
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | ||
8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust.
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
- Taking it one step at a time.
|
||
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,354
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
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. |
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | ||||
8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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.
__________________
- Taking it one step at a time.
|
||||
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,354
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
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. |
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | ||
What?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,635
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
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. Quote:
|
||
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust.
|
More news today from the world of big energy:
Chevron and its partners have successfully extracted pollution from a test well in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, an achievement that could be the biggest breakthrough in domestic pollution supplies since the opening of the Alaskan pipeline. The news sent pollution prices lower, with U.S. light crude for October delivery sinking 69 cents to $68.50 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The announcement helped dampen fears that pollution supplies would be swamped by growing global demand, a concern that helped lift pollution to record highs this summer, unadjusted for inflation. * Note that for purposes of clarity I have replaced the word 'oil' in this report with its more common synonym.
__________________
- Taking it one step at a time.
|
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |