Renewable Energy Sources

jinstall · **Posted:** Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:20 pm

I am sure I can count 100+ wind generators within 50 miles of my house. You can even see them in Google Earth. I like the idea myself. Solar heating as well. Used to use basic PVC mat to heat the pool and hot tub in south florida in the house. No idea why we never used it in the house. If I can ever get out of Germany and back to the US I am 100% renovating the house to use alternate fueling for my needs.

Not sure where the dog eating came in at but it is not half bad, neither is horse.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:33 pm

Here in the Midwest we encouraged the visiting Korean students (mostly ex-military) to go hunt coyote with the local hunters. I made it a point to never investigate the disposition of the coyotes they got. Besides, I got a lot of Toyota 4X4 pickup clutch jobs from the coyote hunters.

When I was researching solar heating, I discovered that in the past, utility companies in Florida would pay to have conventional water heaters installed and rip out solar. One application for solar would be to heat up the process for Bio-Diesel. All it would take would be a conventional solar hot water system and a tank with-in a tank to heat up the vegetable oil to 140 f for processing into biodiesel. Current home brew kits use electric heaters which is a stiff cost to operate.

Steve

Stay away from Polar Bear Liver and Mink. The Polar Bear liver has too much vitamin A and will kill you. Mink should be fed to all the terrorists we catch, it would make water boarding obsolete!!

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

To help out those slow on the uptake, the racist dictionary definition of dog eater:

1. DOG EATER-A derogatory word used to describe people of Asian decent, as they are widely rumored to eat stray dogs.

"That @$#%' dog eater can't drive for doo doo!!"

Makes one wonder where the hell the mods are on this board.

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

No kidding. This is getting disgusting.

crd liberty · **Posted:** Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:52 pm

Long ago I lived on a boat. 73 feet in length, bow dropped down
and could transport tanks, cargo, etc.
In 1968 I had a dog on board and was in the 4th Corp region
of Vietnam near the Cambodia border.
I missed my dog and some young native girl said she knew where it was.
Local Vietnamese army had snipped it and was cooking the thing on a fire.
Was I p+++sed? Of course. I knew than and also before that date that we would never win
that war.
Thanks for all that serve and god bless you and don't get too
close to anyone or anything.
That is what I call a Dog Eater.
Steve

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:55 pm

Kim Jong Il DID IT along with a lot of other bad things.
What is of our concern in this thread is the bad thing he did for Nuclear Power, he gave a lot of fuel to the Anti-Nuke political people.
Since my Nephew did two tours in Korea and a tour in Iraq, I use his Code Name for the jerk Kim Jong Il instead of honoring him by mentioning his name.

I never thought a PC obsessed person would own a Jeep.

jinstall · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:27 am

Garage fusion machine is not unrealistic. A man once built several rockets in his garage and people laughed at him. Now we have people building submarines and spaceships in their back yards. Both of those are recent.

Uffe · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:02 am

warp2diesel wrote:

I never thought a PC obsessed person would own a Jeep.

Neither did I, yet here I am

I've spent more time playing a computer game than I spent on my masters degree. Those 70+ hour weeks (1 month out of 4, rest were 40 hour weeks) I put in studying across 5 years at university were not enough to beat my 7 year obession with playing computer games

That's what I say at least - I never did the maths on it

jinstall · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:14 pm

I hate computer games. They are forbiden in my house.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:32 pm

Sorry about the acronym, P.C. Refers to being Politically Correct where we have to use allot of extra verbiage for fear someone may be insulted. This may have been started by the ink, toner, and paper suppliers, but I am open to being corrected on that pending the evidence uncovered in the investigation.
Personal Computers are Cool. :wink:

Steve

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

Don't worry, you've killed the discussion.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:56 pm

Nuf said

retmil46 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:15 pm

Scientific American article Jan '08 issue.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

Um, by 2050? Or you know, in 16 years with nuclear...

Remember, once again, as newer technologies come online, nuclear plants can be retired. We have many now that are decades old. The point to nuclear is that its clean, its carbon neutral, its fairly cheap one initial costs are overcome, and it can be done right now. If we can get solar working, great, but that will take far more time, and there is no reason not to transition to it as nuclear plants are retired. By 2050 we'd be looking at retiring plants we started building even today.

And my point is that its one thing to argue about energy tech, its another to turn it into a racist diatribe. While I agree with some of warp2diesel's sentiments on technology I can't condone reffering to anyone in racist terms, regardless of what one thinks of them. I don't think thats 'PC' at all, its just respect for cultures. After all, if Kim-Jong Il is a 'dog eater' then so are our South Korean allies, who also enjoy dog meat.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:37 pm

Reflex wrote:

Um, by 2050? Or you know, in 16 years with nuclear...

Remember, once again, as newer technologies come online, nuclear plants can be retired. We have many now that are decades old. The point to nuclear is that its clean, its carbon neutral, its fairly cheap one initial costs are overcome, and it can be done right now. If we can get solar working, great, but that will take far more time, and there is no reason not to transition to it as nuclear plants are retired. By 2050 we'd be looking at retiring plants we started building even today.

And my point is that its one thing to argue about energy tech, its another to turn it into a racist diatribe. While I agree with some of warp2diesel's sentiments on technology I can't condone reffering to anyone in racist terms, regardless of what one thinks of them. I don't think thats 'PC' at all, its just respect for cultures. After all, if Kim-Jong Il is a 'dog eater' then so are our South Korean allies, who also enjoy dog meat.

Not arguing for or against their plan. Just presented the article for others to read and make their own informed decision. Can't do that without presenting all the data involved and both sides of the case.

Just an observation, nothing more - you've argued there's no "magic bullet" solution to our energy situation (with which I agree). But you seem dangerously close to presenting nuclear as just such - that from someone who spent 20 years in that field.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:02 pm

The Southwest has a very high demand for electric power to run air conditioners and when the sun shines the most is when the power is needed the most.
It makes sense to generate the power where it is close to the need.

Steve

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

retmil - I don't see nuclear as a magic bullet either, but even with distributed power sources we still need a 'backbone' that would be reliable. The problem with solar and wind is that they depend on outside factors, you have to build capacity for when they are not operational(storing compressed air still results in major conversion losses as per thermodynamics). Ideally nuclear would be the backbone but be offset by complimentary technologies whenever possible.

Warp2diesel - Very true, and I also support California's efforts to make zero impact homes, essentially using net metering techniques and solar panels to make homes contribute to the grid while people are at work. Smart stuff there.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:20 pm

As far as the "fusion reactor in a garage" articles ( :roll:

), these papers might at least give others basic info on what's involved with trying to achieve a workable fusion reactor.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/fusion-reactor7.htm

jinstall · **Posted:** Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:24 pm

Honda 20 months ago said they could have a Hydrogen car in dealerships within 24 months and everyone laughed. Well the FCX goes on leasing this summer in California for $600 a month. Who's laughing now?

The same time MB annouced BlueTec, Honda annouced they did the same without urea injection. No I am not a Honda buff but I know when cutting edge when I see it. Wait and see what VW-Audi-Seat-Skoda do with FSI in the next 24 months.

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

retmil46 wrote:

As far as the "fusion reactor in a garage" articles ( :roll:

), these papers might at least give others basic info on what's involved with trying to achieve a workable fusion reactor.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/fusion-reactor7.htm

The point to demonstrating fusion in a garage is to show that nuclear technology is not especially difficult, and when funded by a government, even a third world one, there are few hurdles to building it. Some things may be trial and error, however if a nation is willing to sign the non-proliferation treaty the UN will even license them known working designs, eliminating even the trail and error phase. Its just not that difficult anymore, the largest impediment is simply up front capital costs, not the technology itself.

Thats why I'm saying we should not be ignoring it, and we should be considering it. We could popularize safer designs, both in terms of security and in terms of actual plant safety. We could bring initial costs down by scaling up our production, and by targetting designs that do not leave weapons quality waste we would make the path easier for foreign countries to build those designs rather than the ones we do not want in their hands.

Renewable Energy Sources

Who is online