What is happening with alternative energy?

It is nice to see this kind of dialouge going on, at least people are starting to look for energy solutions to replace the dependancy we have on oil, especially foreign. Hopefully, it will stimulate the economy towards creating more green-collar jobs as well. Remember - think globally but act locally.

Sammy wrote:

Just beware of the Snake Oil salesmen selling solutions that don't work.
SNAKE OIL:
Hydrogen Fuel/Fuel Cells - It takes more energy to produce the Hydrogen than the Hydrogen will produce.
Water Cars & HHO - Yes, cars will run on electrically separated H2 and O2 from water, but will produce less power than consummed in the separation process.
Bio-Fuels: If the idea is to sequester carbon, so you put it in a plant, then burn it, guess how much carbon you've sequestered .... ZERO!!!
Electric Cars .... so you charge the battery and run the car with zero emissions. Congradulations! Now, where did you get that electricity to charge the battery? It doesn't live in your wall! Probably from your local COAL FIRED POWER PLANT!!
Compressed Air Cars .... First you get the power to compress the air from the Wall (see above). Then you lose heat energy to the environment as the compressed air tank cools to ambient temperature. Then the air tank cools below ambient when releasing the air .... Again, you get out less than you put in!! And where did you get the juice to put the air energy in??? Yup! Most likely somewhere nasty!!
Think it through people! Beginning to end! Where does the energy come from, where did it go and how much did you waste getting there?

I am not sure on your definition of electric cars. I have mentioned hybrids which are coming out now. As far as the electric grid there is nothing wrong with nuclear plants and FutureGen clean coal fired plants. Actually these have been taken shelved for something better.
http://www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9930421-54.h...
http://www.energy.gov/news/5912.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html
chapter 5

Also the price on electric plug ins is 4 times cheaper than using gas.

The bottom line we can make our own electricity and power. We need to be more self sufficient and we have the technology and the coal to do it with. It is clean, affordable, and better than relying on the Middle East or some country with a thug dictator. We will also produce jobs. It is the politics that get in the way. We need to show the world what we can do and we can sell and help China with future coaled fired plants. This country is broke because everyone if fighting each other. We are running a huge debt and deficits. It is time we fix our infrastructure.

Gerry wrote:

<quoted text>
I am not sure on your definition of electric cars. I have mentioned hybrids which are coming out now. As far as the electric grid there is nothing wrong with nuclear plants and FutureGen clean coal fired plants. Actually these have been taken shelved for something better.
http://www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9930421-54.h...
http://www.energy.gov/news/5912.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html
chapter 5
Also the price on electric plug ins is 4 times cheaper than using gas.
The bottom line we can make our own electricity and power. We need to be more self sufficient and we have the technology and the coal to do it with. It is clean, affordable, and better than relying on the Middle East or some country with a thug dictator. We will also produce jobs. It is the politics that get in the way. We need to show the world what we can do and we can sell and help China with future coaled fired plants. This country is broke because everyone if fighting each other. We are running a huge debt and deficits. It is time we fix our infrastructure.

4 x cheaper doesn't mean cleaner and it doesn't necessarily account for the costs of cleanup after. Nuclear power is a fine example of that, we are still shipping the waste from nuclear plants from one place to another trying to find a clean way to dispose of it. You failed to provide any relative measure of how "clean" burning coal has become compared to say building more hydroelectric dams and decimating the salmon runs further.

History teaches much....When the Romans had a grain shortage,and Egypt then was the source,they did not stop eating,or change their diet,they made them an offer they could not refuse.It works of course.

Sounds gangesterish?..no more than what
oil cartels are doing to us today..bleeding us.

Under the guise of national interest,nations must protect their own.We have become to civilized.Heaven Forfend we upset the Saudis.We rescued them from Saddam,we then just walked away from them...not one
energy consideration was asked of them...These former sheep herders now piratically control the world.We are hostage to them,a willing hostages.You and I,owe our soul to the "Saudi" company store.

The USA did not get this big from being wimpish...but now we pay this ransom,under the guise of supply and demand.We, now are self flagellation our selves,like its our fault,and we should do penance for our sin,the sin of the American way of life.

What we need is an "Anti Gore" type to lead us.

A program like JFKs plan to go to the moon,a Manhattan type plan,More domestic drilling,more atomic power,more coal,more efficient cars,heating systems,air condition systems.

But please don't come around and tell us its our fault for being what we are,sick of that concept.A national guilt. This while the rest of the world,like China,India,just ignores this and with them its full steam ahead,dam the torpedo's.

War, for our life blood should never be ruled out.It will happen.Those in the mid east with nuclear weapons on their minds today, will use them when they acquire them tomorrow.This to threaten and mess with our oil supply.Not a nice scenario!

"Time to make them an offer they cannot refuse!!!"

Sammy wrote:

<quoted text>
4 x cheaper doesn't mean cleaner and it doesn't necessarily account for the costs of cleanup after. Nuclear power is a fine example of that, we are still shipping the waste from nuclear plants from one place to another trying to find a clean way to dispose of it. You failed to provide any relative measure of how "clean" burning coal has become compared to say building more hydroelectric dams and decimating the salmon runs further.

Well there is nothing else. Now people can argue over nuclear energy or coal and that is what they do in Congress. but eventually you will need more energy. And we get trapped in the corner and people say we need more energy it will be too late as it takes 15 years to build anything.

If you look in the future, wars will be over food, water, oil, and religion. It would seem to me we need to get away from that. France uses nuclear, we can use it too along with some other alternatives including wind and solar but most of the power will still need to be from nuclear and coal. We have the resources for this. It is either that or be dependent on the Arabs. And with China growing at 10% and only 10% of their drivers drive at the moment, it doesn't take a rocket scientist that there will be huge demands on the world commodities. There are always trade offs. But for those who are against nuclear and clean coal fired FutureGen plants, I would like to hear any alternatives.

If you can't come up with answers then lets throw away our cars and everything that uses energy.

Frankly, I don't think we have 10 years oil and too start now will take 15 years for anything. We have the technology, we have the coal, why be dependent on other countries?

Gerry wrote:

<quoted text>
Well there is nothing else. Now people can argue over nuclear energy or coal and that is what they do in Congress. but eventually you will need more energy. And we get trapped in the corner and people say we need more energy it will be too late as it takes 15 years to build anything.
If you look in the future, wars will be over food, water, oil, and religion. It would seem to me we need to get away from that. France uses nuclear, we can use it too along with some other alternatives including wind and solar but most of the power will still need to be from nuclear and coal. We have the resources for this. It is either that or be dependent on the Arabs. And with China growing at 10% and only 10% of their drivers drive at the moment, it doesn't take a rocket scientist that there will be huge demands on the world commodities. There are always trade offs. But for those who are against nuclear and clean coal fired FutureGen plants, I would like to hear any alternatives.
If you can't come up with answers then lets throw away our cars and everything that uses energy.
Frankly, I don't think we have 10 years oil and too start now will take 15 years for anything. We have the technology, we have the coal, why be dependent on other countries?

I agree. Part of my point is that conservation has to be part of the solution. Another part is that we have to be smarter about what we choose as "alternatives". If the "clean" alternative consumes more "dirty" energy than it produces, then it is not really very "clean" at all. There are other options that probably won't appeal to most humans at all, but intellectually, they make great sense:
1. Make fewer people
2. Make smaller people (we are harnessing gene modification technology now)
3. Genetically modify our plants for greater food and fuel yeilds.
4. Launch spent nuclear fuels toward the nearest black hole or dying star.
5. Start populating space and the ocean with permanent colonies.

There are a lot of ideas that will definitely work, but making them popular is a problem.

Sammy wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree. Part of my point is that conservation has to be part of the solution. Another part is that we have to be smarter about what we choose as "alternatives". If the "clean" alternative consumes more "dirty" energy than it produces, then it is not really very "clean" at all. There are other options that probably won't appeal to most humans at all, but intellectually, they make great sense:
1. Make fewer people
2. Make smaller people (we are harnessing gene modification technology now)
3. Genetically modify our plants for greater food and fuel yeilds.
4. Launch spent nuclear fuels toward the nearest black hole or dying star.
5. Start populating space and the ocean with permanent colonies.
There are a lot of ideas that will definitely work, but making them popular is a problem.

Well, I think your five points are out of this world. As far as conservation, I just wonder how that would be done in a country without public transportation. Also people lose their jobs then get another job in another town and uses more gas.

The other thing about conservation is that it will be dwarf by the rise of China and India.

The other problem is that when we finally realize what to do, it will be too late, because it will take at least 15 years for the building or implementation of anything.

Not only is butanol a better fuel, but it is energy positive in terms of production where ethanol is not. It can also be transported int pipelines and existing fuel systems without alternation, which ethanol cannot. Ethanol is a product of politics and not science, but then "global warming" is BS too. CO2 is one of every 3883 molecules in air where water vapor is one of 20 each of which absorbs four times as much energy from sunlight as CO2. Water vapor is responsible for 99.9% of all atmospheric heating, but is ignored by the elected class because it is ubiquitous and cannot be controlled or taxed. We can only recover by voting everyone in office out. Do this in three elections and the people will run the country. Let them have one term, bring them home and give them a parade or a rope. That is Democracy!

Adrian Vance

Alternative energy has been an on and off flip flop that I have to admit only shows cleanly that the industry oil and gas have failed in keeping that main consumers ( Americans ) happy with what they are required to provide for out lives to enable us to maintain our investments but here we go again gas is getting to the point where one is having problems buying essentials such as food, medicine, even water, etc. Well there only one thing to do in this matter in my book, we have to individully put efforts into making the " Big Change " that we are over due to set forth. Personally I am beyond the dream of having the ultimate transportation,( considering I moth balled my SUV because I want to do a restoration project with it, I love that truck, but getting to my point when we depend on a product that to be honest is proving to be a pain more and more, we have to consider what should we do to make our lives better?. Well as a man who is doing without and having to ride a 21 speed mongoose ( which is good exercise by the way ) I have come to one conclusion that I feel I have to presue with a passion, I will make my own modification with one of my future vehicle investments, my plan is to achieve unlimited mileage once my modifications are completed and tested to ensure my safety.

I am tired of this game that I am seeing being played on myself and my fellow good hard working americans, as well as those who are victims of the other events of our business infestructure going to the pits. Oil and gas are getting billions of dollars and clearly don't give a hoot and help pollute alone the way to the bank laughing.

Years ago with I first mentioned to a friend of mine who was an executive of a NYC oil and gas firm about my being able to not just modify a vehicle, but to achieve unlimited mileage. He said though it's a good idea that I have to be careful, that doing such a thing will put my life at risk, he further explained that most of the people who where the main investors in oil and gas had bad memories from the ole depression years and would go hog crazy over my doing such a thing, these investors don't want to end up back in the poor house again. Well its funny they seem to be doing that to us won't you say.

So, now that I know what these people are making off out backs I feel it's time for us to get to the next step. How does that sound, a vehicle capable of traveling unlimited distances without a drop of gas. Does that plan seem sound as a model.

Peace from the darkone ...

Oh one final note about the modification goal I'm going to complete, the vehicle will have Zero emissions as well.

Sammy wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree. Part of my point is that conservation has to be part of the solution. Another part is that we have to be smarter about what we choose as "alternatives". If the "clean" alternative consumes more "dirty" energy than it produces, then it is not really very "clean" at all. There are other options that probably won't appeal to most humans at all, but intellectually, they make great sense:
1. Make fewer people
2. Make smaller people (we are harnessing gene modification technology now)
3. Genetically modify our plants for greater food and fuel yeilds.
4. Launch spent nuclear fuels toward the nearest black hole or dying star.
5. Start populating space and the ocean with permanent colonies.
There are a lot of ideas that will definitely work, but making them popular is a problem.

Hmm, Maybe this will change your mind and encourage you to redo your last resort list, what if I mentioned that I found a way theorically to enable the use of solar panels toward a 24/7 cycle, that in the near future I will be sitting down with a team to explain the steps need to be done to make this so, what would that example compel you to do with your list

darkstar4d wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmm, Maybe this will change your mind and encourage you to redo your last resort list, what if I mentioned that I found a way theorically to enable the use of solar panels toward a 24/7 cycle, that in the near future I will be sitting down with a team to explain the steps need to be done to make this so, what would that example compel you to do with your list

In theory, theory is the same as practice. In practice it is not. Show me!

From the outset, based on your description, I am doubtful you have anything useful.

I would be more impressed if you found a way to extract energy from gravity or from a side effect of gravity.

Personally, I think the items on my list are more possible to bring to fruition in the next few generations.

Gerry wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, I think your five points are out of this world. As far as conservation, I just wonder how that would be done in a country without public transportation. Also people lose their jobs then get another job in another town and uses more gas.
The other thing about conservation is that it will be dwarf by the rise of China and India.
The other problem is that when we finally realize what to do, it will be too late, because it will take at least 15 years for the building or implementation of anything.

So what you are saying is, "Fix it, but don't actually change anything??"

Sammy wrote:

<quoted text>
In theory, theory is the same as practice. In practice it is not. Show me!
From the outset, based on your description, I am doubtful you have anything useful.
I would be more impressed if you found a way to extract energy from gravity or from a side effect of gravity.
Personally, I think the items on my list are more possible to bring to fruition in the next few generations.

Well doubt as much as you'd like but I am certain what I have in mind will enable the results I expect, as far as gravity that's another issue that I will consider taking a caution peek at, but to further add, if you can't come up with a solution to the problem that will benefit the current existing populus without extreme steps, does that help to truely resolve the problems or make them worst, what I see is a soilent green type of program, were as in theory to take such a simple step to create a balanced plan that will improve life toward a better result is far less risk for those who have the greater need.
Putting human beings into a stressful environment will only result in actions that will prove harmful to all humanity. To further examplify my point, I have a second project that is actually my first model that compelled me to take the necessary steps with the solar panel issue to adjust my ablity so that I will be able to get this project up and running at the same time, this involves being able to product high voltage without the usual combustion based factors required according to current systems, for example it too will enable the powering up of a private or public structure without gas or oil, thus elimenating that cost completely. Basicall I have a conceptual design standard that I have put together for both systems, they will not require any form of combustionable materials for them to function. These systems again will run 24/7.

Thus based on it's potential benefit toward first and foremost MYSELF I am certain it will make life very easy for me once it is active. If that proves to be successful in theory I am certain other folks will want to know how is it possible for them to do the same. Our society is over due for this kind of step, you yourself see a whole picture and seem to want to chop it up to make it go away ( which it won't it'll only get bigger ).
I go beyond myself, that's why I have the mind set I've shared at this forum, yes life is a major struggle even scary at times, but I take the time out to think in a different way, " If this works for me, it may work for others ".

When one has doubt, one doesn't see, but once one see's there is no doubt. Remember that Sammy.

Sammy wrote:

<quoted text>
So what you are saying is, "Fix it, but don't actually change anything??"

If you go back to post 12, you'll have my answer.

Also, Theory is in design toward implimentation not practice, Active Implimentation of practice.
Hopefully you will see clearity in my future responses in this regard.

Sammy wrote:

Just beware of the Snake Oil salesmen selling solutions that don't work.
SNAKE OIL:
Hydrogen Fuel/Fuel Cells - It takes more energy to produce the Hydrogen than the Hydrogen will produce.
Water Cars & HHO - Yes, cars will run on electrically separated H2 and O2 from water, but will produce less power than consummed in the separation process.
Bio-Fuels: If the idea is to sequester carbon, so you put it in a plant, then burn it, guess how much carbon you've sequestered .... ZERO!!!
Electric Cars .... so you charge the battery and run the car with zero emissions. Congradulations! Now, where did you get that electricity to charge the battery? It doesn't live in your wall! Probably from your local COAL FIRED POWER PLANT!!
Compressed Air Cars .... First you get the power to compress the air from the Wall (see above). Then you lose heat energy to the environment as the compressed air tank cools to ambient temperature. Then the air tank cools below ambient when releasing the air .... Again, you get out less than you put in!! And where did you get the juice to put the air energy in??? Yup! Most likely somewhere nasty!!
Think it through people! Beginning to end! Where does the energy come from, where did it go and how much did you waste getting there?

Well since you brought up the subject, electric cars, now that is the way to go for transportation, with zero emissions no dought, as far as recharging yes it is limited mileage based on the charge factor, but think of it like this what if a independent power supply can be created to enable no need for a rechargable battery, a source of power that doesn't need to be even hooked up into an outlet, that is what it takes to correct the in-balance either correct the flaw or just walk away from it I chose to correct the flaw.

Gerry wrote:

<quoted text>
I am not sure on your definition of electric cars. I have mentioned hybrids which are coming out now. As far as the electric grid there is nothing wrong with nuclear plants and FutureGen clean coal fired plants. Actually these have been taken shelved for something better.
http://www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9930421-54.h...
http://www.energy.gov/news/5912.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html
chapter 5
Also the price on electric plug ins is 4 times cheaper than using gas.
The bottom line we can make our own electricity and power. We need to be more self sufficient and we have the technology and the coal to do it with. It is clean, affordable, and better than relying on the Middle East or some country with a thug dictator. We will also produce jobs. It is the politics that get in the way. We need to show the world what we can do and we can sell and help China with future coaled fired plants. This country is broke because everyone if fighting each other. We are running a huge debt and deficits. It is time we fix our infrastructure.

You hit it right on the mark Gerry and I would like to let you know that, I for one am in full agreement with you regarding being independent of the power grid, there are ways that are being done that arn't that effective, but with modifications and the mind set to find alternative idologies are the key to doing it right, I gave an example to the same member of this forum who feels we have to take steps that would lead to a unstable environment.
I look at it this way We have the capabilities of doing great things but at this stage we have to look for the pieces to the new puzzle that is there, it's design is based on the individule mindset, whew, surprised I got that out as clear as I've done. Anyway this country came into being by a dream that this countries forefathers put together, it was not perfect and yes there where a lot of mistakes, but they have been restructured to enable a gradual advancement toward what will one be called the advancing of the American Dream.
I know that I for one can and will take the steps to enable myself to generate high volume electrical power because I have found a potential way to do it one I have my system laid in place.( just hope I don't give myself the shock of my life considering high voltage tend to do that )
The best thing about this concept, is to my knowledge no one is applying the system I figured out can be utilized, just getting it off the ground it the only hurdle. The surprising thing about this concept is that I don't have to spend tens of thousands or more to get it started in fact I'd say it'll take a few hundred dollars to do it. I expect to get it under in the very near future.