| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/22/2008 10:46:41 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
...I feel that solar power is the best option, and that there will be more efficient and more cost effective solar power in the near future. The energy in full sunlight is about 1.4 kW per square meter, but we don't have the tech yet to use it effectively. That's about 4.9 million horse power per square mile, enough to make a lot of toast in a hurry.
Hypert textbook 1998 |
Exactly, the ultimate answer. Eventually, the gigantic nuclear reactor in the sky will provide all of the energy that we will ever need. Actually, it already does. We just need to learn how to collect, convert, and store it for our specific needs better than we do today. Whoever figures this out first will be wealthier than the king of Saudi Arabia ever thought of. |
Umm Saudi Arabia?
Saudi Arabia to become solar power centre |
|
|
|
06/22/2008 11:04:11 PM · #27 |
|
|
|
06/22/2008 11:11:10 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
Ban most environmentalists and we wouldn't have energy crises. And we would probably have a cleaner, better Earth to boot. Most of the environmentalists don't care what damage they do, what long term problems they cause or how un-compromising they are as long as they can fulfill their agenda. You can think the environmentalists for the US not having more refineries to process the oil that is available right now and having additional sources of both non-renewable and renewable fuels and energy available. Paticularly in creating sources of minimal impact sources of energy like wind, solor, hydro, geo-thermal, wave and in finding clean ways to process coal and oil shell (which we have supplies of that will last for generations if not centuries).
I hope if nothing else, the impact we are seeing on the US economy wakes up a bunch of people to the fact that many of the environmentalist groups out there have gone way over board in what they have been able to prevent. There are a few good groups that realize there has to be a balance and compremise. But they are usually shouted down by the fanatical groups.
Mike |
Of course breathing more pollution would have solved this pseudo crisis we're seeing now. The air you breath today is cleaner than it would have been if the bad environmentalists didn't stop big business from building refineries in your back yard. I don't see how the enviros are responsible for the lack of solar powered energy either. |
|
|
|
06/22/2008 11:54:26 PM · #29 |
Disregard all new ideas and keep destroying any pristine soil we have?
I dunno.
I like wave power
Message edited by author 2008-06-22 23:55:49. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:22:55 AM · #30 |
I look for solar power to someday come from desert areas near a cool ocean shore. By using the temperature difference between the hot earth and the cool sea water to drive turbines or some sort of closed system machine, like the steam turbines in a conventional steam plant. The system would evaporate liquid at medium pressure on shore, and run it thru the turbine, then condense it back to liquid using the cool sea water. A pump would then return the operating liquid back to the shore to repeat the cycle.
It would be similar to the system used for geothermal electricity production, though with lower temperatures and less temperature difference between hot and cold ends of the system.
I will say that the air quality has improved quite a bit from what it was in the 1960's when I was growing up, thanks mostly to automotive tech advancements.
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 01:26:43.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:51:25 AM · #31 |
OK, I watched the first 60 seconds and that was about all I could take. Well, then I went back and listened to some more. Now I've had enough when the "proof" is a name which I won't mention who talked to another guy and said, "yes, it's true".
You gotta be kidding.
Can anybody find ONE link to something that looks reputable that would indicate that the Alaska North Slope has more than 260 billion barrels of oil in it? (260 billion being the accepted number for Saudi Arabia's reserve which Lindsey Williams claims is smaller than the one in Alaska)
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 01:51:53. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 10:34:22 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Disregard all new ideas and keep destroying any pristine soil we have?
I dunno.
I like wave power |
Any method that you think of to exploit energy will add to the entropy of the universe. I'm starting the entropy movement today. In honor of George Carlin. To participate; Simply do nothing! I'm good at that. LOL
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 10:38:59. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 10:38:31 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Well, then I went back and listened to some more. |
This is your Achilles heel doc.
heheheh
I stopped listening when I realized he did talk just like a Baptist minister, preaching his sermon. Big surprise huh? |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 10:49:06 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Disregard all new ideas and keep destroying any pristine soil we have?
I dunno.
I like wave power |
That has it's own problems though. Putting wave generators in the water will have effects on ocean currents and who knows what potential downsides that'll have. The power used to generate electricity in a wave generator has to come from somewhere, and it will likely come from reducing the speed and/or direction of ocean currents.
In my opinion, solar research is where we need to go to. There's a giant nuclear fusion reactor in the sky giving off billions of watts of energy and harnessing that energy would be ideal. The only downside to this is the space required to build something like it, but there is a considerable amount of dead space on the planet and even in the US. Put them on top of road signs, houses, office buildings, anywhere possible. There's a lot of real estate for mounting solar panels that's being wasted
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 10:50:27.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:01:57 AM · #35 |
Somehow I doubt the average person can "simply do nothing". Everything you buy, drive, turn on, turn off, step on, eat, drink, touch, etc. affects other things.
Doing nothing is not a choice.
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Any method that you think of to exploit energy will add to the entropy of the universe. I'm starting the entropy movement today. In honor of George Carlin. To participate; Simply do nothing! I'm good at that. LOL |
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:14:13 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Well, then I went back and listened to some more. |
This is your Achilles heel doc.
heheheh
I stopped listening when I realized he did talk just like a Baptist minister, preaching his sermon. Big surprise huh? |
Well, I figured I'd give him a chance. Who knows, I thought, maybe he has some facts and figures. Brrrrttt! The funny thing is, I thought he sounded like a baptist minister before I knew that he actually was one. :)
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:18:39 AM · #37 |
I'm a big proponent of solar. They both have downsides though. Solar uses toxins in manufacturing. Solar energy levels are unpredictable.
Since we are raping the earth now and plan on raping the seas for oil, I think dismissing wave power for fear of how buoys affect ocean currents is a little harsh. It's already being used in several locations and the results have been more positive than negative. Successfully reducing our use of fossil fuels will involve many technologies.
more.
more2
more3
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
That has it's own problems though. Putting wave generators in the water will have effects on ocean currents and who knows what potential downsides that'll have. The power used to generate electricity in a wave generator has to come from somewhere, and it will likely come from reducing the speed and/or direction of ocean currents.
In my opinion, solar research is where we need to go to. |
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:30:47 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:
What is needed is a new resource that keeps the planet safe, and all humans happy. |
Exactly what would this new resource be?
Considering that the planet has never been safe, and never will be, and all humans will never be happy. A quick look at the DPC personal forum will verify this. |
Gravity...
Magnetism... |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:41:24 AM · #39 |
From Market Watch:
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Producing oil from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska could cut crude oil prices by about 75 cents per barrel by 2025, the Energy Department said Thursday in a special analysis prepared for Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska. The price decline would be about 0.6% of the current spot price. Under federal law, no drilling is now allowed in ANWR. Under the most likely case, production would begin in 2018 and peak in 2027 at 780,000 barrels per day, with total production of 2.6 billion barrels.
So, in 10 years or so, oil prices will go down 75 cents per barrel. What does that mean at the pump- nothing.
The oil companies will receive nearly 7.5 billion dollars in incentives, even if no oil ever comes out of ANWR- this is the real incentive for the oil companies to spend millions to push for the drilling.
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 11:45:40.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 11:52:44 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by lunensa:
We aren't going to "destroy the Earth" it will be here long after we make it uninhabitable for us to live. As George Carlin said, "Maybe Mother Earth made us to make plastic. Now that she has it, she's done with us." |
Yeah George Carlin said a lot of interesting things.
Sorry, I don't mean to change the subject here.
BTW, He died today at age 71 from heart failure. He was born in New York but lived in California. George Carlin Dead at Age 71
Oil may not be the actual crisis, or reason for price increases.
We are and will be changing to alternative fuels to power our cars, so the oil companies are making one last attempt to reap as much as they can. Although. they will probably end up selling their Hyrogen or whatever at their service stations and still charge just as high prices.
At least, then the air will be cleaner.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 12:04:00 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by metatate:
I'm a big proponent of solar. They both have downsides though. Solar uses toxins in manufacturing. Solar energy levels are unpredictable.
Since we are raping the earth now and plan on raping the seas for oil, I think dismissing wave power for fear of how buoys affect ocean currents is a little harsh. It's already being used in several locations and the results have been more positive than negative. Successfully reducing our use of fossil fuels will involve many technologies. |
I think that wave power is a great way to get those additional benefits from energy that would otherwise be wasted. But relying on it too much could have a significant impact on global weather patterns and ocean currents. I do agree though that using it as a compliment to other sources is an effective means to produce electricity.
What toxins are used to make solar panels?
I would also support nuclear power generation if there was a good solution on where to store/dispose/recycle waste. Aside from the waste storage issue, nuclear power is just as expensive (per kWh) as coal fired power but it's much cleaner and fuel supplies are much more plentiful.
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 12:06:07.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 12:16:18 PM · #42 |
I believe cadmium is used in most. A heavy metal / carcinogen.
Edit: I guess this might only be used in the latest, super-thin stuff where you could make a solar "film" that could be molded around things.
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
What toxins are used to make solar panels?
|
Message edited by author 2008-06-23 12:18:01. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 12:33:13 PM · #43 |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 12:35:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by metatate:
.
Doing nothing is not a choice.
te] |
Actually doing nothing is a choice.
What you should have said was doing
nothing is not a helpful choice. If
you're gonna be a "Greenist" you've
got to master the language. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 12:44:11 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
What toxins are used to make solar panels?
|
It doesn't really matter what toxins are involved as long as they are managed properly.
Make sure no one is harmed while the units are manufactured, and minimum toxins are released to the environment. Then make sure the products don't leach toxins back into the environment after their useful lifetime.
I like the solar solution a lot myself. Both electro-voltaic and heating solutions. The heating solutions allow for heating large pools of mineral salts or light liquid metals like sodium. This creats a source of heat to be converted after dark. |
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:40:30 PM · #46 |
While we are on the energy and toxins subject;
Something that you need to know about compact florescent lights. (Light bulb police, 5 min vid clip)
Us Congress in Session
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:48:15 PM · #47 |
Howcome nobody has come up with a way to get somewhat unlimited energy from our largest natural source?
The sun
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:52:25 PM · #48 |
No -
I think "CHANGING" nothing IS a choice.
It's too difficult to "do nothing".
Try to "do nothing" for 1 day.
I'm being a literalist, not a greenist.
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by metatate:
.
Doing nothing is not a choice.
te] |
Actually doing nothing is a choice.
What you should have said was doing
nothing is not a helpful choice. If
you're gonna be a "Greenist" you've
got to master the language. |
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 01:56:04 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
Howcome nobody has come up with a way to get somewhat unlimited energy from our largest natural source?
The sun |
Every energy source known to man comes from the sun ultimately. Some more directly than others with the least direct being nuclear and chemical reactions.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2008 02:07:02 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
Howcome nobody has come up with a way to get somewhat unlimited energy from our largest natural source?
The sun |
Every energy source known to man comes from the sun ultimately. Some more directly than others with the least direct being nuclear and chemical reactions. |
Yes, I've heard that before. However we are using byproducts of solar energy. I am wondering if we would be able to get direct source of the sun? Cut the middle source. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/14/2025 05:39:30 AM EDT.
