(April 20, 2020 at 8:06 pm)arewethereyet Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 7:58 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I am not equating getting off fossil fuels like quitting smoking. Where did you get that from?

I only have this entire thread say we have to, and the sooner the better.

Humans require fuel? NO WAY!

Humans once had iron key typewriters now we have cell phones. What makes you think it is impossible to replace burning fossil fuels with clean energy?

The only thing I can agree with is the argument of "will we"? In that context global greed and big oil CEOs have been obstructing that change for over a century. But we have had solar since the 1920s. So it isn't a matter of can we, but a matter of changing minds. Either way, humans have no choice long term. It would be better to try for our species, than to give up.

I don't assume sh*t. I am merely saying humans have no choice but to try.

Does your trailer have solar panels yet? 

Does your taxi driver drive a car that runs on gas? If so, maybe you should think about getting a bicycle with a basket big enough to hold your smokes and beer.

Yeah...we should be working on alternative energy but let's not pretend that that you are living off the grid fueling your computer and internet with hamster power.

The point isn't for the small guy to act like a corporate CEO, the point is those with the money and power at the top to move to make it cheaper for everyone.

---

But not sure. As far as solar, I live in a monopoly utility county so not sure my particular local allows for solar panels.

(April 20, 2020 at 5:30 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 4:58 pm)Mr Greene Wrote: Shareholders will shift their investment wherever the best return on investment is.

Which is likely to bankrupt the petroleum industry (or at least large parts of it). That would be bad.

Boru

It will bankrupt the part of petroleum industry that needs high oil prices to survive in the long run and need a large cash reserve to survive the current crunch, namely the shale oil producers that so recently made the US the largest oil producer in the world again after decades.

---

(April 20, 2020 at 5:55 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 4:46 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I know the world cant get off fossil fuels in a day, but the truth is science has known as early as the 1890s that burning too much greenhouse gasses/CO2 will damage the planet.

I hope our species isn't beyond the point of no return. But the fossil full industry CEOs and shareholders are not going to give up without a fight. I could care less if a barrel of crude was a penny, it will cost far more to ignore the global warming burning fossil fuels in the future if we continue to ignore the damage it is causing.

You "know"?

Really...

Is your degree in mechanical engineering? You have a doctorate in thermodynamics? 

How exactly did you come by this "knowledge"?

And tell us how you are going to harness the terrawatts of power we need for a medium sized US city.... Then tell us where the rest of the planet is going to get theirs.....


Your "knowledge" you are pontificating smells suspiciously like an ill formed opinion in my book.. I'm betting "just think happy thoughts" has a great deal to do with your "knowledge".

You know, neither mechanical engineering nor thermodynamics is central to replacement of fossil fuel.  

(April 20, 2020 at 4:32 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: The US market price for light crude is now -$35/barrel. This is clearly the time to buy. If you buy ten barrels of oil, you get the oil PLUS $350.

That’s how it works, right?

Boru

Mate, I just went to the petrol station to fill up and the man at the counter said that'll be $59 thanks. So he opened up his till, pulled out $60 and asked if I had a dollar to give him!








(yeah, I wish!)

(April 20, 2020 at 11:57 pm)AFTT47 Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 7:43 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: We are not talking about quitting smoking - where you can just cut back a bit - and eventually you can do without.....


To maintain the population level at the current consumption levels - you need a certain level of input energy to do it. Without fossilized hydrocarbons or a serious investment in nuclear (and that's a pollution nightmare for hundreds of generations) we are fucked.

You are a moron if you think rooftop solar and a few windmills is going to do the job.

You simply do not understand the scale of the problem - so you just assume somebody will find "the answer".

You are mistaken. It's true that roof-top solar won't do it but solar farms along with wind turbines and some nuclear and hydro will. It will take time - hence the generally accepted timetable of 2050 as a realistic goal.

I would have agreed with you just 10 years ago but we have reached the point where photo-voltaic panels are now the most economical way to produce power. It wasn't long ago when they were the least economical way to do it.

Then there is fusion. We can't afford to count on that holy grail but if it comes, energy production ceases to become an issue. We will be in a post-scarcity society.

I don't want to be blindly optimistic but I think it goes without saying that the prospect of extinction tends to light a fire under one's ass. We'll get it done.

Ahhhh yes....

I wondered how long it would be before somebody dragged the deus ex machina of fusion out of their ass.

It's clung to like a xtian waiting for Jebus to come back and make it all better....

https://atheistforums.org/thread-60853.html

You can see here how oil reached this level.
It happened last month btw. And I wrote about it

Is that why gasoline has been so cheap?

(April 20, 2020 at 5:55 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 4:46 pm)Brian37 Wrote: I know the world cant get off fossil fuels in a day, but the truth is science has known as early as the 1890s that burning too much greenhouse gasses/CO2 will damage the planet.

I hope our species isn't beyond the point of no return. But the fossil full industry CEOs and shareholders are not going to give up without a fight. I could care less if a barrel of crude was a penny, it will cost far more to ignore the global warming burning fossil fuels in the future if we continue to ignore the damage it is causing.

You "know"?

Really...

Is your degree in mechanical engineering? You have a doctorate in thermodynamics? 

How exactly did you come by this "knowledge"?

And tell us how you are going to harness the terrawatts of power we need for a medium sized US city.... Then tell us where the rest of the planet is going to get theirs.....


Your "knowledge" you are pontificating smells suspiciously like an ill formed opinion in my book.. I'm betting "just think happy thoughts" has a great deal to do with your "knowledge".

MSR's fit the bill. Good clean energy. Uses the stockpile of radioactive waste as fuel, doesn't have the risks of traditional nuclear reactors.

What's not to love?

(April 22, 2020 at 7:23 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:

(April 20, 2020 at 5:55 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: You "know"?

Really...

Is your degree in mechanical engineering? You have a doctorate in thermodynamics? 

How exactly did you come by this "knowledge"?

And tell us how you are going to harness the terrawatts of power we need for a medium sized US city.... Then tell us where the rest of the planet is going to get theirs.....


Your "knowledge" you are pontificating smells suspiciously like an ill formed opinion in my book.. I'm betting "just think happy thoughts" has a great deal to do with your "knowledge".

MSR's fit the bill. Good clean energy. Uses the stockpile of radioactive waste as fuel, doesn't have the risks of traditional nuclear reactors.

What's not to love?

"MSR's"?

(April 22, 2020 at 9:18 pm)Fireball Wrote:

(April 22, 2020 at 7:23 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: MSR's fit the bill. Good clean energy. Uses the stockpile of radioactive waste as fuel, doesn't have the risks of traditional nuclear reactors.

What's not to love?

"MSR's"?

A type of reactor that runs a "dry pile" using salts as coolant. Neat idea - but the materials-  like Hasteloy- needed to withstand the combinationa of salt corrosion and neutrino enbrittlement - are expensive and a motherfucker to machine.. (I have made parts out of it... .)

Plus - added bonus - all the shit that needs frequent replacing is radioactively hot for centuries. It's a 50 year old idea that never went anywhere because of cost.

Ask a nuke about the particulars... I'm just a schmuck who got a lecture about it...

(April 22, 2020 at 9:36 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(April 22, 2020 at 9:18 pm)Fireball Wrote: "MSR's"?

A type of reactor that runs a "dry pile" using salts as coolant. Neat idea - but the materials-  like Hasteloy- needed to withstand the combinationa of salt corrosion and neutrino enbrittlement - are expensive and a motherfucker to machine.. (I have made parts out of it... .)

Plus - added bonus - all the shit that needs frequent replacing is radioactively hot for centuries. It's a 50 year old idea that never went anywhere because of cost.

Ask a nuke about the particulars... I'm just a schmuck who got a lecture about it...

OH. Molten Salt Reactors. My experience is with US Naval Pressurized Light Water Reactors, though I did get a bit of exposure to nuclear theory during my physics training and subsequent work in plasma isotope separation. I think that you meant neutron embrittlement, btw, not neutrino. Just a nit-pick. I was a Navy "nuke", made it through the first 6 months of classroom, and was at the hands-on training unit and celebrating making 2nd class when some people got into a "disagreement" in a local bar. It was boots and fists and pool cues all over the place. I was no longer a "nuke" or a PO2. I was lucky that the locals turned me over to the Navy for my special court-martial. Kind of hard to hide that you've been in a brawl when you show up at quarters without your glasses and big ol' knot on the side of your head from a pool cue.    I just didn't run from the scene fast enough, I guess.