TSK TSK TSK...How soon you all forget..about a month ago I posted some statistics about oil and alternative energy sources.

The conclusion is that solar is not viable as it would take so many millions of square miles of solar panels to provide a vertible fraction of the power needed in the USA. That it would be impossible to get enough coverage.

Nuclear is the only viable energy source that can even provide anything close to the power consumed in the USA.

The World consumes something like 86 million barrels of oil a day.

Quiet frankly without oil as the strategic fuel, modern life as we know it would cease to exist. THe shear economy of scale that we enjoy would be over in the world. How would your life be different without electricity is the question that has to be asked.

It is nice to think about exploring alternative energy sources as a pancea for our problems, but to be polite it is not viable.

I am not trying to belittle anyone. The facts alone will bear out the reality of the situation. The world for better or worse to sustain it's economy cannot do without oil.

well no Tabs, not with that attitude ;)

Ohhhh U like me better when I'm nastier....

I think Wayne hit the nail on it's head. Only reason middle-east countries aren't what they were 50 years ago (a bunch of tribes, really) is the whealth they enjoy by selling oil. Take away that source of income and they will soon fade away.

Problem is, people are short-sighted and usually don't understand this quasi-complicated way things are connected. Many of them just want cheep gas to fill up their SUV's and will vote for whoever obtains that for them, in short turn.

What we need is another source of energy.
ITER fusion reactor needs around 60 billion dollars of funding alltoghether... compare that to costs of intervention in Iraq. Compare the results.

What is the near-term solution, though? $60B+ and 10 years won't do anything for our problems now. You speak as if fusion research is a replacement for the war in Iraq. Ignore the right/wrong issues.

What do we do in the next 8-12 months?
What do we do in the next 1-3 years? I'm not talking about alternative energy. I'm talking about fending another large-scale terrorist attack(s) with potential to kill thousands and disrupt the economy of the US and the world.

As has already been mentioned, oil has high output for the cost. If we truly want to be independent, are we ready to pay a lot of $$$? If our energy costs soar 35%, while China buys petro at a 35% discount (due to reduced US demand), the economic fallout could be horrendous. It's not so easy.

On the other hand, things like solar water heaters are very effective. There's large potential there. It won't make a dent in our consumption, but it would certainly help.

techweenie, you're starting to sound like superman (i.e. "it's amazing where you guys come up with this stuff..." "pretty lazy thinking" etc) What's your outline for action?

Glad you posted that, Island. Let's see, you reiterated your three assertions about oil, and added that you are smarter than Tech, and more experienced.

"Unlike yourself I don't have to think too hard to understand the variables here." Glad to see that we're pursuing a productive, respectful discussion about energy. We're assuming from your post that you have handled solar cells and reversible fuel cells and we notice that this should put you in a position to help us with this discussion about energy.

As for your SUBSTANTIVE offerings, it sounds something like "Don't bother. Oil is here to stay and there's nothing we can do about it." Perhaps it's out of our ignorance (compared to your knowledge and background) that we have optimism about energy independence.

Sorry, but I'm growing weary of the insults. You should too. In the unlikely event that a liberal or moderate might make a valid point, you then have to slip into some really untenable positions to counter it.

As I have said, the power of these ME countries is going to remain, and then get worse, until their advantage (oil) is cut off at the knees. And we can do that. We're America. We put a man on the Moon and returned him safely to the Earth. That was thirty-five years ago.

I'm sorry, Turbo, if I've seemed acutely critical lately. It looks like that may be your impression. Historically I think I have actually been acutely respectful, but these past few weeks I have been reacting to both the entrenched polar extreme positions here with about 95% barbs and 2% meat, and the appearance here of a guy who has taken mudslinging to a whole new level. This has apparently given woodies to some of the more already-disrespectful so-called "contributors." So, I'm disappointed to the point of being quite angry.

This site has been my home for more than four years and I have, on many occasions, expressed my sense of wonder at the fabulous community we have here. I hate to see beautiful things die.

Again, sorry. I'm trying to return to the respectful spirit I am used to here, and thinking that maybe I just need to stay away from this OT forum, at least until its participants can begin to allow for a productive discussion.

Head meets Nail .

I suppose I too could jump on the "Ought" bandwagen. Everybody likes the dreamer. I could go on and on about how "we ought to be more efficient.. . we ought to be using anything but oil. . .evil, evil oil. . .yadda yadda bing bang."

But you know what? . . . that talk is cheap. The "correct" choice of energy source is all very old news to me. BTDT.

beeper- ". . .50 years ago (a bunch of tribes, really) is the whealth they enjoy by selling oil. "
Well, yeah. but do you think that money will evaporate overnight with the slow down of their oil sales? Do you think asia won't start buying all they can?

I'd like to hear Island remind us of the anti-American pessimism of the liberals, and the effervescent optimism and national pride of the conservatives. You know, the ones who think we're doomed to dependence on foreign oil. Alternative energy sources are beyond our creative talents.

Let's hear it.

island911: "btw, have you ever designed a solar panel? Have you ever experimented with reversible (PEM) type fuel cells?

Do you think you are the only one to consider the latent costs of hydrocarbon fuels?"

------------
Hmm, well, I apologize for my tone, first off.

It's not lazy thinking if you're not in the industry.

I however, am in the industry as major investor and President of an alternative energy transporatation startup, and have spent the last 4 years reviewing oil alternatives.

The most 'mature' of these technologies is the battery area and within the next year, we are anticipating big breathroughs in lithium. Among our consultants are the folks who engineered the Gossmer Condor. We are associated with some of the pioneers in hydrogen fuel cell technology.

So, yes, I think oil is something the world can wean itself off of. And I think we'll all be better off for it.

The first solution to energy problems would be to stop wasting it like pigs, but that may already be asking too much ...

I am curious about which breakthrough you are talking about, Techneweenie. Polymer electrolytes for Li metal ? New cathode materials ? I have been in the Li-ion research business for a few years now (worked with Bellcore at some point). So, I am just curious. Consulting firms sometimes call breakthrough what has been known for years. Any details?

There does not seem to be one single replacement solution for oil, but a combination of new energy sources and less energy consuming devices.

Solar could not do it alone, Tabs is correct. But it could, for instance, provide the energy for AC in a house during summer.

The gas consumption of cars in the US could be reduced by half.
The energy use for lightning even more than half for with solid state white diodes that do not emit in the IR, and therefore do not have joule energy losses.

Cold fusion is the holy Graal, and could be achieved by electrochemical route. Some results are very promising and intriguing.

All I know, is that I will always have a job in the chemical energy storage and conversion research...Not that this will prevent beheadings from occuring, but at least I feel like my life has a useful purpose.

Aurel

Click the link below and select any topic of interest/concern. You will see Kerry does offer some pretty good answers. You should also know that Clinton came pretty close to a mid-east settlement. We need another democrat to make good things happen, republicans at least at the national level have lost their touch.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/

He probably hasn`t, but I have. I am currently working on photoinduced charge transfer from conjugated polymers such as polyalkylthiophenes to semi-conductors. This opens the path to flexible solar cells. And right now, I am programing a lock-in amplifier with Labview to acquire photocurrents. Only problem is that win2000 won`t see the driver for my gpib card. Any clue, Dr. Island ? Can I tap into your unlimited knowledge to get my experiments started ? LOL, I am serious. If you can help...

Aurel

How do Kerry's proposals differ from the current stance? I clicked on the website. I saw words like "encourage," "stabilize," "eliminate terrorist network." How is this different from GWB's work? It all sounds very good, but I see similiar promises from other presidential candidates (past and present), to some extent.

If you want really big changes, vote Libertarian. They want immediate withdrawal from Iraq. I don't agree with that, but there'e nothing ambiguous about that stance. :)
jürgen

Below are bush's people, as they whisper into his ear....we can build a new Roman Empire.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

The Libertarian's have great short term thinking and theories, but fall short in the big picture/long term..................some of them act as if they have never opened a history book.

AAAAAHHHH!http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/vuur.gif I'm in agreement with Aurel. . .AAAAAHHHH!http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/vuur.gif

somebody shoot me.


oh wait, Aurel gets in a dig. . . Are U REaL, AUREL . . doubting me like that!?http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/nono.gif

tell ya what, if I demonstrate that what I said is true you will change your sig to
"John Kerry for President . .. of FRANCE!" :D okay?

On Labview. . .I haven't used it under win2000. I would sugest using the simplest OS that will work (NT?). . .maybe on a dedicated cmpt box (theyre cheap) just to simplify the problem.

btw, I was wondering when you would find this thread. . .I almost pm'd ya, to let you know. . .but figured you were too busy spending govt money.:cool:

Quite a number of windmills have been constructed in Northeastern Oregon over the last few years. More are planned for OR and WA.

Windmill farms in West Texas as well.

As long as we throw up our collective hands and say "It's impossible", things will never change.

Perhaps it is time for us to begin listing alternatives in order of ease of implementation.

For example, would it be possible to "outlaw" the incandescent bulb in favor of more energy efficient alternaives? What eould be the timeline? the cost? the potential savings?

Would it be feasable here in AZ, for instance, for people to put solar panels on the roof to operate AC systems, adding the cost to their property taxes over a period of years, say.. Years ago, credits were given "back east" for increasing weatherproofing and insulation.

Just a couple of ideas, probably not the best.

Thanks for the tip. I finally made it work. Not sure exactly how, but it works. It was about my main achievemnt of the day, besides testing a bunch of batteries and musing on the pelican BBS. Ahhh, the pressure of government sponsored research :cool:

Aurel

Aurel: the breakthroughs I'm talking about are the 'lab' breakthroughs in polymer-based, silicon-graphite and other technologies that sound so promising. We'll evaluate the products as they ship and decide which will work best for us.

Our issue is related to weight, in that our primary application is a conventional bicycle with on-demand electric propulsion. We use a 700 watt high RPM motor with reduction gearing.

Our design objective is a vehicle in the 40-45lb. range with a battery that gives double the current NiMH range of 20-25 miles without substantial increases in weight or mass.

As you may know, the first company to incorporate Li-ion in a bicycle had to recall them all because the batteries caught on fire -- somewhat offsetting the weight/mass advantages...

Yup, Li-ion is perfect for small batteries, but the safety is still an issue on larger ones. What kind of numbers are you looking for in terms of Wh/kg and W/kg ? You can get 150-180 Wh/kg-1000-600 W/kg from Li-ion, 40 Wh/kg-2000 W/kg from a modified version of it, or 4 Wh/kg-5000 W/kg from supercapacitors. I wrote a paper that compared the various technologies in Journal of Power Sources. E-mail me if you would like a copy of it.

Aurel

Supplying fuel to produce the energy that the world uses is a BUSINESS. As such it has to show a PROFIT in order to stay in business. Without that supply of energy what does the world revert to?

The Chairman and CEO of XOM said, "We are in the energy business." Not the oil business, therefore XOM would use any form of fuel supply that makes energy that would be profitable. XOM was at one time in Nucklear power..but divested itself because of the political baggage inherent in the business, which made it unprofitable.

Oh and profits are so bad.....Wayne how long would you be sponsoring this site if your business wasn't profitable....this is just one of the benfits of profitability we enjoy.