1. We are currently experiencing issues with viewing and uploading images, our team is working on the issue.
    Dismiss Notice

Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ttystikk, May 8, 2017.

  1.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    He might be being a dick to you, but in this case he's right.

    The long read I posted above is extremely informative. Worse, there isn't a limitless supply of fossil fuel sourced gas any more than there is for oil.

    To give you an idea of how much of a desperation play the tar sands really are, consider the fact that for every barrel of oil shipped out of Alberta, at least 19 more barrels' worth were burned. That is among the highest energy production multiples in the history of the industry, which in fact is itself terminally plagued with rising costs of production.

    Every barrel requires a larger and larger percentage of itself to be used in its production, leaving ever less for the global industrialized world.
     
    Gquebed likes this.
  2.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    No doubt we need something else. But what? Nothing gets the same energy bang for your buck. This is the root of the problem.

    Solar aint it. Not without some incredible advancements in the tech. And i mean incredible. Wind farms have proven to be the flop that they promised to be.
    Tidal turbines maybe? I dont know...

    What about harnessing the energy from gravity? Somebody working on that?
     
    Fogdog, Abiqua and ttystikk like this.
  3.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    Im only a dick to people when they are to me. I never start shit. But i generally dont back down from that kind of shit either... you likely noticed this about me by now...lol
     
    ttystikk likes this.
  4.  
    Abiqua

    Abiqua Well-Known Member

    why cant it be all of them working in colusion? one problem we have currently with this is grid use, which requires immediate demand and batteries need a ways to go. One interesting way is a giant spinning capacitor, they ran buses this way in Sweden in the late 50's.
    Battery tech or rather energy storage might be more important than the source.

    others
    Rain kinetics
    Solar mass
    Water solar mass
    underground piping
     
  5.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    In colusion?
    Meh. If you have seen the square mileage of solar panels required to power x number of homes...plus the square mileage of turbines for same... then it is quick to see that either or or both together isnt going to cut it. Never mind the swath of other problems that each have. Neither are efficient or sustainable or reliable. Putting them together doesnt solve those problems.... regardless of the naive optimism of those who profess these techs to be viable.
     
  6.  
    Fogdog

    Fogdog Well-Known Member

    Harnessing energy from gravity is called hydro-power.

    There are studies that show 100% renewable energy grid is feasible right now.
    Renewable energy
    Some or all of the above. Not one alone. Solar would be a big portion but doesn't have to be all of it and biofuel/biomass, Geo, tidal can all make up for energy use during night times. Batteries wouldn't make sense except for critical non-stop operations that have them already. Large-energy using companies are already making conversion to solar. This puts the lie to the idea that industry suffers with the switch-over. It's feasible until people do something stupid like deny climate change or let the fossil fuel lobby buy access to lawmakers through large political campaign contributions.
     
    Grandpapy, ttystikk and Justin-case like this.
  7.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    No idea how one would harness gravity other than hydro power... If we could reliably make it rain on mountaintops that would work, right? LOL

    Why do you say wind turbines are a flop? They work great and have lower installed cost than new fossil fuel power plants- and no ongoing cost for fuel. No one expected them to be a replacement for base load generation.

    Denmark uses the battery capacity of the nation's electric cars to balance their country's electrical load. That could easily be part of the solution here, too.

    But wind power is not the whole answer, and few ever touted it as such.

    We need something else. Please don't say nuclear... We haven't figured out how not to destroy our planet with nuclear power and I'm not certain we ever will.

    Solar can easily handle consumer power, socially in rural and suburban areas- again, using electric cars to balance loads. I've always felt that rooftops are the most wasted real estate in modern society and this would be an excellent way to put said space to good use.

    For industrial power, solar isn't so great. It isn't constant and it doesn't lend itself well to high intensity use.

    Geothermal is a big potential source of energy and it would serve baseload needs very well. Big, multi gigawatt plants are definitely doable and would generate all the power needed for intensive industrial and baseload applications, even aluminum smelting. It isn't terribly evenly distributed but on the other hand, Yellowstone alone could power the whole planet for centuries! If we tapped the heat from it in a serious way, we might even be able to prevent it from blowing up and causing the planetary catastrophe geologists tell us it's already overdue for, and that would be a nice bonus to pass onto our kids. It would go a long way towards making up for 100' of sea level rise and mercury in the ecosystem. California's Mammoth Hot Springs is another such place.

    But what about transportation? Electric ships and airplanes are impractical with current technology- though to be specific, it's all about the battery; a better battery (meaning more energy dense, lighter) would absolutely solve this problem.

    Do maybe what we really need isn't another power source, but a better battery.

    Just thinking out loud here, feel free to poke holes in my logic...
     
    Fogdog likes this.
  8.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    Yeah, but I've met @Unclebaldrick and he's a good guy with a level head. And no thumbs... Lol

    I think you guys would get along well over a pint of beer and I know just the place.
     
    Gquebed likes this.
  9.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    I agree with the first part but the second part is still a stretch.

    Better batteries/capacitors would help a lot.

    Geothermal isn't technically renewable but it is all but limitless in terms of any foreseeable energy needs. This could easily serve as a new backbone of non fossil fuel baseload energy production. Still leaves air and sea transportation out in the cold, though...
     
    Gquebed likes this.
  10.  
    Fogdog

    Fogdog Well-Known Member

    I read your post and the idea of using car batteries as a buffer sounds good. I don't know how people will feel about their car not at max charge when they leave for work is one problem I can see might be different here than in Denmark. Batteries, with all the rare-earth metals, and environmental cost of digging it out of the earth, processing it, manufacturing the batteries and then handling the waste stream as batteries of different vintages reach end of life, make them less sustainable compared to other choices. The emphasis being sustainable for the long haul. IMO I'm not saying I know exactly how to do this. It's feasible if we have the will to do it is where I think we agree.
     
  11.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    Hydro power is something i associate with dams/rivers.

    I am talking about harnessing the energy from the earth's rotation. Is that hydro too?
     
    ttystikk likes this.
  12.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    The windfarms we have up here work fine until...they go flying to pieces or seize up. Lol

    Same probs in Germany.

    But the biggest reason is that it takes a lot of square mileage of farms to produce a minimal amount energy. Same prob with solar. South africa has a number of solar farms as does california... they are immense. The ratio is something like 2 acres of land powers one single family home. For both solar and wind.

    The math on that isnt good. Lol
     
    ttystikk likes this.
  13.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    Possibly. He seems quite bright. Not sure why he is so aggresive with me though... seems to pureposely misunderstand and misinterpret in order to insult...

    Although that isnt unusual o this site...lol
     
  14.  
    Fogdog

    Fogdog Well-Known Member

    Earth's gravity is a force related to it's mass. Energy is gained when an object moves downward, like water. In the case of water, it is heated and eventually rises, then can be re-used when it drops back to sea level. I suppose there could be another way to cycle a gravity power generator. I don't know what that would be.

    Earth's rotation is due to how it was formed in the first place. So, different from gravity. It continues to spin due to rotational momentum, again related to its mass. Tidal power and wind are two sources of energy that is generated in part by the earth's rotation. There might be other means, such as a spinning gyroscope. Russia has experimented with this. Emphasis on experimented.
     
    Grandpapy, ttystikk and Gquebed like this.
  15.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    How would you do that?
     
    Gquebed likes this.
  16.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    Exactly.
    I dont know. Lol
    But there must be a way.
    And there is an endless supply of it.
     
  17.  
    Gquebed

    Gquebed Well-Known Member

    Arent tides dependant on the moons rotation... or rather the moons gravitational pull on earth? Or is it a combination of opposing gravitational forces?
     
  18.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    Google sez; "The Earth is 123 billion acres in size, of which 37 billion acres are land. This means that there are a notional four acres available for every man, woman and child in the predicted 2050 world population 0f nine billion, which would be an increase of two billion on the present population." So there's some elbow room yet.

    We are blessed with lots of acreage in garden spots like Nevada and Wyoming. Some of best places them are offshore. Turbines are getting much more reliable and robust. In fact, FP&L said the turbines in the path of Irma were undamaged.

    Google also sez, "An average 1.5-MW turbine (26.9% capacity factor) would produce the same amount of electric energy as that used by almost 332 households over a year. It must be remembered, though, that wind power is intermittent and variable, so a wind turbine produces power at or above its annual average rate only 40% of the time."

    That means your notional figure of 2 acres per household is extremely conservative, since even big turbines don't need 150 acres each.
     
    Gquebed likes this.
  19.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    ... Until the Earth spirals into the sun, lol

    I'm not counting this as a viable option until there's some kind of evidence it exists.
     
  20.  
    ttystikk

    ttystikk Well-Known Member

    Sun and Moon, so yes, ultimately tidal power is harnessing gravity.
     
    Gquebed likes this.

Share This Page