God will save us from climate change

[Guest TrueMetis]

I see my examples of wind power solutions were overlooked.

The problem here is you've got people who already accept that wind can work and other who won't pretty much no matter what.

ETA and for the whole the efficiency of wind power will only increase a few percent thing, the same argument could have been made about the internal combustion engine. They stagnated for years but suddenly when the need came up they hugely increased in efficiency. Of course oil is more constrained because of the energy lost due to heat.

Edited November 16, 2010 by TrueMetis

[TimG]

I see my examples of wind power solutions were overlooked.

Do you have a source other than a youtube clip? Fact checking a youtube clip is much tougher because they have no links and you can't cut and paste terms into a search engine.

[Oleg Bach]

No one will save man from pollution and climate distruction - humanity - hates nature - which is like hating God and goodness..to hell with them - let them burn.....bitter? No - just pragmatic...all problems that result - are generated by hate....and the hate comes in all colours and shapes - one form of hate is contained in the word "environment" - which has nothing to do with nature.....What do we expect from a world where modern children NEVER witnessed or grew up playing in nature - they are artifical adults who use the word green - but do not know what a tree it.

[TimG]

The problem here is you've got people who already accept that wind can work and other who won't pretty much no matter what.

If people build it without subsidies then it works. The only way to find out if it works is to take away the subsidies.

[dre]

If people build it without subsidies then it works. The only way to find out if it works is to take away the subsidies.

Is that what we have to do to find out of nuclear energy "works" as well?

[Guest TrueMetis]

If people build it without subsidies then it works. The only way to find out if it works is to take away the subsidies.

When was the last time any power plant has been built without subsidies? You know except for wind and solar when people build it for personnel use.

Edited November 16, 2010 by TrueMetis

[GostHacked]

Do you have a source other than a youtube clip? Fact checking a youtube clip is much tougher because they have no links and you can't cut and paste terms into a search engine.

That prevents you from looking into it? Yikes. Your lack of webskills is disturbing. Did you notice there is a text box below the video that shows some information on what the video is talking about and provides links to the company's website?

And you can simply listen and then search for the material. It's not that hard.

But it's more to the point that wind energy has not reached it's peak. Far from it, it's just getting started.

[GostHacked]

When was the last time any power plant has been built without subsidies? You know except for wind and solar when people build it for personnel use.

People should be personally investing in this technology for their homes. If the subsadies are there, then take advantage of it. The mentality shift needs to get away from a government centralized regulated grid delievered energy system to a self sufficient home solution that people can grab on to. These hybrid win/solar solutions for the average home are more than affordable these days. When the lights go out for everyone else, you are still good to go.

Again it does require a major shift in how people think about energy production/distribution/storage.

Edited November 16, 2010 by GostHacked

[bush_cheney2004]

...These hybrid win/solar solutions for the average home are more than affordable these days. When the lights go out for everyone else, you are still good to go.

This approach ignores the higher maintenance and (lacking) technical skill of the average consumer/homeowner, as well as building codes, standardization, electrical safety, and reliability.

[Guest TrueMetis]

People should be personally investing in this technology for their homes. If the subsadies are there, then take advantage of it. The mentality shift needs to get away from a government centralized regulated grid delievered energy system to a self sufficient home solution that people can grab on to. These hybrid win/solar solutions for the average home are more than affordable these days. When the lights go out for everyone else, you are still good to go.

Again it does require a major shift in how people think about energy production/distribution/storage.

Well I don't think it will be possible for everyone or every building to be self sufficient though I agree that a centralized grid is a bad idea. A better solution would be homes that are self sufficient staying connected and feeding the system with their excess. With such as system power outages wouldn't happen nearly as often. Though larger power plants would still be required.

It's really interesting that there are so many potential solutions to the energy problem we just have to pick one, or a combination of several.

This approach ignores the higher maintenance and (lacking) technical skill of the average consumer/homeowner, as well as building codes, standardization, electrical safety, and reliability.

You exaggerate the complexity of a wind turbine and the maintenance costs.

Edited November 16, 2010 by TrueMetis

[GostHacked]

This approach ignores the higher maintenance and (lacking) technical skill of the average consumer/homeowner, as well as building codes, standardization, electrical safety, and reliability.

Ever try to fix your modern computer driven car these days? That's more complex and harder to understand compared to these things. Also it would be in their own benefit to do some of the work themselves. They save money and actualy learn a skill.

[dre]

Well I don't think it will be possible for everyone or every building to be self sufficient though I agree that a centralized grid is a bad idea. A better solution would be homes that are self sufficient staying connected and feeding the system with their excess. With such as system power outages wouldn't happen nearly as often. Though larger power plants would still be required.

It's really interesting that there are so many potential solutions to the energy problem we just have to pick one, or a combination of several.

That idea for the most part only works for low-rise buildings. Even that alone would be huge.

Thats more or less where I think we will end up going. The problem is right now though that the technology is still too expensive.

I worked on a building project up here (western canada), where a friend of mine built a house about an hour out of town on a lake, where theres no grid. We installed two large banks of solar panels, inverters, water preheating, battery storage, and a very small windmill.

The system works very well and he has energy to burn.

The problem is it the system cost about 50k, and electricity here is only 7 cents per KWH, so it would take about 20 years to recover that initial investment. That was a kickass system though... probably overkill. And prices have come down a lot since I worked on that project.

[dre]

Well I don't think it will be possible for everyone or every building to be self sufficient though I agree that a centralized grid is a bad idea. A better solution would be homes that are self sufficient staying connected and feeding the system with their excess. With such as system power outages wouldn't happen nearly as often. Though larger power plants would still be required.

One of the problems is you need a fairly sophisticated GTI (Grid Tie Interface). You cant just dump power into a grid... it has to be clean and in phase, and youll still need a certain ammount of central management by the grid authority.

[waldo]

I draw the line at subsidies for production/consumption because such subsidies distort the economy and are not scalable.

If people build it without subsidies then it works. The only way to find out if it works is to take away the subsidies.

Take the tiny fossil fuel subsidies away and they still will be used widely.

that's quite the, uhhh... 'wrinkle' you used by quoting that WSJ article and playing off so-called "standardized costs" by emphasizing per unit of energy subsidization. Of course, that charade completely obfuscates the huge subsidies fossil-fuels receive, even today... what you call, "tiny". That same EIA report offers a breakout on Production Subsidies and Support - here: Tiny fossil fuel subsidies?

That is the ONLY measurement that matters. Quoting total subsidies without taking into account the amount of energy produced is nothing but propoganda designed to deceive the uninformed.

no – it allows you to play your own propaganda tune, labelling fossil-fuel subsidies as “tiny”… while ignoring the significant direct subsidies to fossil-fuel producers and the even more significant subsidies to consumers intended to keep costs artificially lower… notwithstanding how fossil-fuel subsidies counter sustainable development goals while leading to higher consumption/waste potentials.

tiny? The International Energy Agency, in its latest report for the G20:

subsidies provided to producers of fossil fuels may be on the order of US$ 100 billion per year. The total order of magnitude of subsidies to consumers and producers – almost US$ 700 billion a year - is roughly equivalent to 1% of world GDP

A rough estimate by the Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) indicates around US$ 100 billion per year are spent to subsidize alternatives to fossil fuels.

so… there appears to be a "tiny" US$ 600 billion a year disparity in subsidies... favouring fossil-fuels over its alternatives. Clearly… by your own earlier admissions – you draw the line at your described “tiny” fossil-fuel subsidies and they should be removed, right? Get right on that – hey?

[Guest TrueMetis]

One of the problems is you need a fairly sophisticated GTI (Grid Tie Interface). You cant just dump power into a grid... it has to be clean and in phase, and youll still need a certain ammount of central management by the grid authority.

This is where an updated smart grid comes into play. Everything else in the world is getting computerized but the one thing where it make huge sense is still using 100 years old infrastructure. The amount of computerization the electrical grid has is tiny.

I worked on a building project up here (western canada), where a friend of mine built a house about an hour out of town on a lake, where theres no grid. We installed two large banks of solar panels, inverters, water preheating, battery storage, and a very small windmill.

The system works very well and he has energy to burn.

The problem is it the system cost about 50k, and electricity here is only 7 cents per KWH, so it would take about 20 years to recover that initial investment. That was a kickass system though... probably overkill. And prices have come down a lot since I worked on that project.

Look at the Youtube videos that Ghosthacked posted earlier. One of them has links to a wind energy site, if I remember the amount of energy a house needs correctly the $17000 kit should more than cover electrical consumption.

Her's the link to the website.

Edited November 16, 2010 by TrueMetis

[bush_cheney2004]

Ever try to fix your modern computer driven car these days? That's more complex and harder to understand compared to these things. Also it would be in their own benefit to do some of the work themselves. They save money and actualy learn a skill.

Yes...it is a simple matter for me to connect to my car's OBD2 network, ECU, and/or PCU. I have the tools and skills.....most people don't. You are advocating for a lifestyle and maintenance obligation that is beyond many people's reach without significant recurring and nonrecurring costs compared to the existing AC power generation grid. May work fine for you...

[bush_cheney2004]

....Look at the Youtube videos that Ghosthacked posted earlier. One of them has links to a wind energy site, if I remember the amount of energy a house needs correctly the $17000 kit should more than cover electrical consumption.

Her's the link to the website.

Great....have you purchased and installed such a kit yet? If not...why not?

[Guest TrueMetis]

Great....have you purchased and installed such a kit yet? If not...why not?

I rent.

[Bonam]

Look at the Youtube videos that Ghosthacked posted earlier. One of them has links to a wind energy site, if I remember the amount of energy a house needs correctly the $17000 kit should more than cover electrical consumption.

Her's the link to the website.

$17000? Considering my electricity expenditures, that'd take about 100 years to pay for itself. No thanks.

[bush_cheney2004]

I rent.

Excellent...that raises another consideration for cost and maintenance.

[Guest TrueMetis]

$17000? Considering my electricity expenditures, that'd take about 100 years to pay for itself. No thanks.

Then buy one of the cheaper ones if you don't use that much electricity.

[dre]

This is where an updated smart grid comes into play. Everything else in the world is getting computerized but the one thing where it make huge sense is still using 100 years old infrastructure. The amount of computerization the electrical grid has is tiny.

Yup. The tricky part is that the power itself has to be managed at the point of generation. Every single node on the network would need that "intelligence".

Its doable though, and I believe we will go in that direction.

[bush_cheney2004]

$17000? Considering my electricity expenditures, that'd take about 100 years to pay for itself. No thanks.

Yes...and your point leads to conservation and efficiency being a far better investment in the short term.

[Bonam]

Then buy one of the cheaper ones if you don't use that much electricity.

Why? There is no near or even medium term financial benefit to doing so, not to mention installing these systems involves time, effort, and periodic maintenance. A solar water heater on the other hand is a great investment that pays for itself very quickly. In fact, I built one myself for a tiny fraction of the commercial cost.

[Bonam]

Yes...and your point leads to conservation and efficiency being a far better investment in the short term.

Indeed. Get better insulation, more efficient heating systems (or wear a sweater), go outside when its hot instead of using the AC, and you just cut about 90% off your power bill.