Posts: 271
Threads: 27
Joined: February 8, 2012
Reputation:
6
Clean Green Energy
February 10, 2012 at 12:18 pm
Clean energy - Surely one of the most important issues facing humankind in the modern world - The more ideas and investment that get thrown at the problem, the better
Here's an interesting new one that I havent come across before:
http://m.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/201...pe=article
I just hope that things like this receive the correct funding, at least exhaust the possibility before discarding the idea - I have known about the theory behind fusion power for a long time, but it seems to have made little progress towards a viable working model in the past 15-20 years - The funding it receives is pitiful, but then why would the powers that be want cheap energy, when there's so much lovely fossil fuel left to sell and burn.
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 10, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Very interesting...... I can see the oil company lobbyists lining up to kill it.
Posts: 66301
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 10, 2012 at 1:06 pm
(This post was last modified: February 10, 2012 at 1:10 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Nuclear energy was the energy of yesterday, not tomorrow. It got tanked in large part by concerted efforts from soviet propaganda that were delivered to a receptive audience in the hardcore environmentalist movement of the time. So disappointing. It's still better than oil, and that's what makes the situation even worse. A technology that could be outdated is more up-to date than the current technology in use.
I'm a big fan of nuclear, but ultimately see it as a stopping point between current practices and a better approach. If you're looking for green energy, why not focus on things that are actually green..hehehe? Energy tech isn't going to be the silver bullet that solves our "energy problem". That's going to take massive revision in passive designs, infrastructure, urban planning, related technologies (appliances etc) as well as changes in our culture and what we use energy for, how we use it, and how much we use, in short..we need to rethink ourselves from the bottom up because what we've been doing is not working, and is a legacy of our ignorance with respect to this issue.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 12513
Threads: 202
Joined: January 3, 2010
Reputation:
107
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 10, 2012 at 11:16 pm
(This post was last modified: February 10, 2012 at 11:18 pm by KichigaiNeko.)
What I find disheartening is that the "Stop-Gap" solutions are more energy inefficient or down right dangerous like the current trend to use "Clean-Green-Fluoro Light globes", Gas powered Public transport is another area where the cost of 'being Green' far out weighs the return of reduced emissions.
rhythm Wrote:That's going to take massive revision in passive designs, infrastructure, urban planning, related technologies (appliances etc) as well as changes in our culture and what we use energy for, how we use it, and how much we use, in short..we need to rethink ourselves from the bottom up because what we've been doing is not working, and is a legacy of our ignorance with respect to this issue.
This is such a big ask and is no where near foreseeable. What makes it worse is that all these ideas are there...ready to be developed, have been for decades and frustratingly nothing is being done nor looks like it will be done.
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 10, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Anybody read enough of this "article" to see this paragraph?
woo article Wrote:Yes, the accelerator will require power input – around 20MW – but that power can be taken from the ADSR's own output, leaving an excess 580MW of electric power.
Can anybody tell me why perpetual motion is a physical impossibility?
Posts: 30571
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 11, 2012 at 12:52 am
This isn't a perpetual motion scenario - fuel is added to the system.
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 11, 2012 at 12:59 am
(February 11, 2012 at 12:52 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: This isn't a perpetual motion scenario - fuel is added to the system.
Which powers itself. I think some people here need to read about pseudoscience scams such as Joseph Newman's machine.
Posts: 30571
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 11, 2012 at 1:17 am
(February 11, 2012 at 12:59 am)Phil Wrote: (February 11, 2012 at 12:52 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: This isn't a perpetual motion scenario - fuel is added to the system.
Which powers itself. I think some people here need to read about pseudoscience scams such as Joseph Newman's machine.
I'm familiar with Newman's "Energy Machine" (which as you say is bunk). This isn't in the same category at all.
This is really no different from a typical fission reactor in use today, except that a U235 doesn't require input energy to get the reaction started, and Thorium does. It's less efficient than U235, but safer (according to it's theory of operation).
This isn't a perpetual motion device, and doesn't claim to be. It's not producing energy, it's releasing potential energy stored in the fissile fuel.
Now, it does need 20MW of power to "bootstrap" the reactor, and that's going to have to come from an external source on the grid. Once it's up and running, there's no reason I can think of that the 20MW operating energy can't come from the the same grid that the output would be connected to.
I'm not quite sure I get the point you're trying to make.
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 11, 2012 at 1:27 am
(February 11, 2012 at 1:17 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I'm not quite sure I get the point you're trying to make. I can't say I'm surprised at this.
Posts: 30571
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Clean Green Energy
February 11, 2012 at 1:36 am
(February 11, 2012 at 1:27 am)Phil Wrote: (February 11, 2012 at 1:17 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I'm not quite sure I get the point you're trying to make. I can't say I'm surprised at this.
WTF?
I'm not sure where THIS is coming from. Let me see if I can clear this up from my perspective.
I have no doubt you have a point you're trying to make. Perhaps I'm being overly sensitive, but you appear to be implying that I'm too stupid to see it. I assure you, that is not the case. Perhaps if you'd spend a minute or so making it clear what you're on about rather than insulting my intelligence, we could have an intelligent discussion about this.
Then again, if you'd rather be an asshat about it, by all means, carry on.
|
