Alternative energy = the next internet?

[The Gaijin]

Originally Posted by kach22i

"directing investment opportunities"

I think thats the way they did in the old East Germany and USSR.

All of these alternative energies are propped up by tax dollars. Other people's money going into the pockets of those who lobby and pay off those doing the "directing".

And they pretend to be "Green" to cover these thefts.

[Seahawk]

One of the big areas for me when I was the Program Manager for Navy and Marine Corp UAS' was improvements in batteries.

Interesting stuff:

http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_16326,303,p1.html?a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f

[island911]

In the future, changes in energy, to power cars and heat homes will all come from a giant vat of this new technology called " Hope." ... Vat O' Hope. (VOH)

Some think it will fail miserably, but they just aren't doing enough to squeeze out their "fair share" of this New miracle energy to add to the Bigger common Vat O' Hope.


Seriously, you cannot change the laws of physics....no matter how much you hope.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

One of the big areas for me when I was the Program Manager for Navy and Marine Corp UAS' was improvements in batteries.

Interesting stuff:

http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_16326,303,p1.html?a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f

Cool stuff.

ultracapacitors ........... carbon nanotubes

What happens to a battery's charge when you cryogenically freeze and spin it like crazy?

Just a crazy question I've been thinking about for no reason - good for wires though.

http://www.amsc.com/products/htswire/index.html

The HTS wires AMSC manufactures today conduct over 150 times the electrical current of copper wire of the same dimensions, which dramatically reduces the size and weight of electrical equipment and significantly increases the power throughput of power cables. These characteristics offer product developers the ability to design components with HTS wire -- such as coils for industrial and naval motors or generators -- that deliver much higher power density and can offer additional benefits such as reduced manufacturing and maintenance costs.

EDIT:
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0911451

Abstract : Many Improvised Explosive Devices (IED's) are fired by discharging electricity from a battery directly into an electric detonator. The purpose of this study was to determine if one possible method for defeating these type IED's would be to cool the batteries to cryogenic temperatures. Only those batteries readily available to the general public were investigated.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=19016650

Résumé / Abstract
Superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES) is more fast response, economical, and environment-friendly than uninterruptible power supply (UPS) using the battery

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

To be fair you didn't say a successful rocket launch.

har!!

the launch went fine - there HAVE been some orbital dropouts

re fishing for industry info

the internet is the LAST hole I'd fish in

F soloar and some others are likely in valueline's extended ed. -- that is the #1 place to get good surveys on stocks

i would want to spread the risk also -- a mutual fund would be great but mgmt. fees could be out the roof

you might find out what pickens is buying and try to just follow him

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

All of these alternative energies are propped up by tax dollars. Other people's money going into the pockets of those who lobby and pay off those doing the "directing".

And they pretend to be "Green" to cover these thefts.

yes, unlike the oil industry, the nuke industry, the coal industry

what drivel

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RWebb

yes, unlike the oil industry, the nuke industry, the coal industry

what drivel

Those industries pull gold from politicians just like any other but they don't require subsidies to exist like solar.

[RWebb]

of course they are subsidized!

coal - pollutes but doesn't pay the medical costs of its pollution - much less the other costs

nuke - no liability for radiation effects by act of congress; waste storage not paid for

oil - military costs not paid for, env'l damages not paid

only listed 1 or 2 but each industry is riddled with subsidies

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RWebb

of course they are subsidized!

coal - pollutes but doesn't pay the medical costs of its pollution - much less the other costs

nuke - no liability for radiation effects by act of congress; waste storage not paid for

oil - military costs not paid for, env'l damages not paid

only listed 1 or 2 but each industry is riddled with subsidies

I ceded that there are subsidies, the difference is that only solar cannot exist as a profitable enterprise without them.

[RWebb]

I see. But one needs a quantitative analysis to determine which conventional sources -- if any -- could survive without THEIR subsidies.

The real issue is whether you focus on the future or not.

is there any doubt that solar is one of the ways to go? the Germans, the Saudis, and seemingly every Asian country + US VC's think it is.

solar includes more than just PV solar of course - our national labs already built a large mirror array using liq. Na as a working fluid
- we can expand building design to use soalr, add on hot water panels and more

[targa911S]

gererators

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RWebb

is there any doubt that solar is one of the ways to go?

It's scary that you're serious. Of course there is a question. The market will vet the technology better than any government every could. So far the markets say "yea, not so much". So again, yes there is a question.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

One of the big areas for me when I was the Program Manager for Navy and Marine Corp UAS' was improvements in batteries.

Interesting stuff:

http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_16326,303,p1.html?a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f&a=f

This is part of the real issue. Too many are thinking "old school" - alternative energy to replace hi volume/hi output (ie use the sun instead of a oil fired power plant). Instead I think the real money will be in *energy efficiency* in all forms of devices and processes coupled with small scale output by alternative sources.

[serge944]

I kinda like where we are now...

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

It's scary that you're serious. Of course there is a question. The market will vet the technology better than any government every could. So far the markets say "yea, not so much". So again, yes there is a question.

guess I am too much of a scientist, eh

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RWebb

guess I am too much of a scientist, eh

Oh please, is there anything you don't claim to be an expert in? Even given that I hope you understand an education in a curriculum does not make your assumptions correct. Many an (actual) expert disagree. "Scientist", what a gloriously vague term.

If a capitalist society like ours can't find a way to make any money from solar (without direct subsidies)then it's far from a foregone conclusion. Hell, they're making money on ethanol after subsidies and only a damn fool would get behind that.

[RWebb]

I've never claimed expertise in any subjects except science and law. I am a former university professor and am a professional physiological ecologist. What do you want, a CV?

Markets are not known for looking very far down the road - how many CEO's and analysts have excoriated the quarter by quarter short-sightedness of markets? HINT: P AG is one.

We are indeed lucky that short-sighted people like you are not in charge of our energy policy. It will improve a LOT more in 77 days.

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by RWebb

I've never claimed expertise in any subjects except science and law. I am a former university professor and am a professional physiological ecologist. What do you want, a CV?

Markets are not known for looking very far down the road - how many CEO's and analysts have excoriated the quarter by quarter short-sightedness of markets? HINT: P AG is one.

We are indeed lucky that short-sighted people like you are not in charge of our energy policy. It will improve a LOT more in 77 days.

Just science and law, you might not want to pigeon-hole yourself

As a business owner I proclaim myself an expert in all things business/market related and thereby I'm correct on this. Sorry for your luck

Seriously though, solar conversion is a very old idea, hell it was the friggen 1800's. People have been refining it for 150 years, it's a know quantity.

I'm not saying it can't be improved, but guys like you have been pretty slow with the goods

[turbo6bar]

I've been pricing out vacuum solar tubes to build a DIY solar water heater. I am having a tough time making the economics work, even when pricing suspect Chinese-built vacuum tubes. For a 20 tube array, I am getting cost savings of $5/month vs a natural gas fired water heater. This was with output of 2000 BTU/hr and 8 hours of sun. In the summertime, the output would increase dramatically, but then I may be absorbing too much heat and getting little increased cost savings.

I really want to make this work, but I'm not going to spend $1000+ and many man-hours fabrication time if the payback time is in the order of decades. We aren't even talking about the professional evacuated tube units ringing the cash register at $3000-7000.