News:

Also, i dont think discordia attracts any more sociopaths than say, atheism or satanism.

Main Menu

To crap with the Chevy Volt

Started by Jasper, September 22, 2008, 08:50:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

East Coast Hustle

Quote from: Felix on October 04, 2008, 06:49:01 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on October 04, 2008, 05:50:38 AM
Quote from: Felix on October 04, 2008, 05:27:58 AM
Energy can be stored in all kind of creative ways.

One somewhat odd idea is to have spare energy lift a heavy weight.  The weight remains suspended until energy is needed, then released on a flywheel to generate electricity.

Another way is to have spare energy power hydrogen synthesis machines that turn water into oxygen and hydrogen, and store the hydrogen.  Hydrogen storage is imperfect, because hydrogen atoms are the smallest atoms it tends to leak out of things, albeit somewhat slowly.

There are lots of ways to store hydrogen though.  There's a wiki on it.  But the point remains, you'd only need to store enough to last you the night anyway, and any that leaks out will just go back into the atmosphere.

should I assume you have stopped taking this conversation seriously, or should I ask you for some of whatever you're smoking?

Are you going to leave it at that?  I'd like to hear why you don't think it'd work.

you really need me to explain why storing energy in the form of hanging weights isn't something that would work on a national or global scale?

where can I go buy one of these hydrogen synthesis machines?

and your assertion that solar power would solve most of our problems if we could just figure out how to store the energy overnight is great for people who live in the sun belt. those poor fuckers in the PNW (or anywhere else that isn't sunny every single day) will just have to deal with it, right?

don't get me wrong, I agree with you about the imminent and burning need to find alternative carbon-free sources for energy, but solar energy is too unreliable to be more than a supplementary source for the foreseeable future.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

East Coast Hustle

Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Kai

Solar doesn't work in all areas because a) you need the input energy to be consistent enough for large scale operations, ie the southwest and b) we don't have a good way to store the electricity or any electricity for that matter at this point. There are also environmental costs associated with it, as there will be with any large scale energy operation. Wind follows suit for the same reasons, and so does tidal power. Hydroelectric is environmentally unfriendly, it alters the flow regimes in rivers which can cause massive ecosystem problems both upstream (in the resevoir) and down stream. Its like a beaver dam except long term and on a massive scale. Its also unviable over the long term since the resevoir will eventually end up filled with silt. Coal is the old fasioned way to generate electricity, but its not exactly clean. Nuclear is clean but then you have the waste issue. Fusion is of yet a science fiction story. Biofuels for electricity and transport have some of the same environmental and efficiency issues as coal. Hydrogen fuels for transport are very costly and as of now are still utilizing hydrocarbons (ie oil) to derive hydrogen. Oil is not going to be around at transport viable levels forever, and has environmental problems associated with all aspects of its production.

In Wisconsin, you can't really use solar power, there aren't enough days of sun. Its okay for wind power but the people keep shooting down wind initiatives (not in MY backyard, they say). Hydroelectric dams are actually being dismantled on Wisconsin rivers rather than built, because people are becoming more ecologically concious. No one wants a new nuclear power plant or coal fire powerplant in their backyard either. Biofuels and hydrogen fuels are still not available, and oil is going down the tubes here. At the same time, the population of Wisconsin and its energy needs is growing. No one wants new power plants to handle the extra load, yet the load is there.

Which is why I say that the only real solution to our energy problems is lifestyle change. Since that won't happen, I'm convinced that things are going to continue to get worse until people are forced into it.

And we aren't even started talking about WATER, hah. Water is the new oil.   
If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water. --Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey

Her Royal Majesty's Chief of Insect Genitalia Dissection
Grand Visser of the Six Legged Class
Chanticleer of the Holometabola Clade Church, Diptera Parish

Honey

Quote from: East Coast Hustle on October 04, 2008, 04:34:42 AM
I am still under the impression that the biggest problem with solar is an effective means of storing the energy, not the cost-effectiveness of producing it in the first place.

is that no longer true?

for the record, I think tidal power is the most promising potential carbon-free source of energy, but it is hard to see how to adapt it to be useful in the context of personal transport.

unless you live in an estuary and kayak to work.

wishing i lived in a place where i could kayak to work.  sigh
Fuck the status quo!

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure & the intelligent are full of doubt.
-Bertrand Russell

East Coast Hustle

I agree with Kai.

change in consumption/use patterns will have a much larger and more immediate impact than any of the emerging technologies at their current points of development.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Jasper

So far, I've said or at least tried to say that every clean energy source is at least right now only part of the solution.  Our energy is going to have to come from many sources.  Noone wants to live in a nation that  runs entirely on air power, for example.  Many solutions at once is the key.

And yeah, lifestyle too.  Not having people leave their computers on all night would help, for instance.  Still, I'd argue that the economy and the environment would benefit from solar roofing in some areas.  At very least it would reduce reliance on power companies.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Do you know how much solar roofing costs? In real life, I mean, not theoretically?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Kai

Quote from: Felix on October 04, 2008, 06:21:27 PM
So far, I've said or at least tried to say that every clean energy source is at least right now only part of the solution.  Our energy is going to have to come from many sources.  Noone wants to live in a nation that  runs entirely on air power, for example.  Many solutions at once is the key.

And yeah, lifestyle too.  Not having people leave their computers on all night would help, for instance.  Still, I'd argue that the economy and the environment would benefit from solar roofing in some areas.  At very least it would reduce reliance on power companies.


Unfortunately we are economically and socially used to centralized power. Multi-source power is an idea you have to convince the public is good, and then furthermore convince them to have it going on in their neighborhood. Right now most people think of power plants as being something that is /over there somewhere/, and point in a general direction or say "well, everyone knows that the power comes from a power plant..." People don't know where their power comes from, they don't know where their water comes from and where their sewage goes. Most people don't care, as long as the prices stay low, the power keeps coming, and they don't have to feel the perceived direct environmental and aesthetic affects. When people start caring in large numbers and become mindful of such things then change will happen because with that will be lifestyle changes. Right now I don't see the slightest inclination toward such a movement. In fact, I see a movement towards corporatization of water and sewage, municipalities selling off their systems to the highest bidder, and then realizing years later the results that have come from the poor job that these corporations do (ie Atlanta).

I think you would find that its not "no one would want a nation run on wind" but rather more "not many care about our nation running on coal, as long as they don't have to see it out their window".
If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water. --Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey

Her Royal Majesty's Chief of Insect Genitalia Dissection
Grand Visser of the Six Legged Class
Chanticleer of the Holometabola Clade Church, Diptera Parish

Bruno

Quote from: Felix on October 04, 2008, 07:09:18 AM
One somewhat odd idea is to have spare energy lift a heavy weight.  The weight remains suspended until energy is needed, then released on a flywheel to generate electricity.

I've done the math on this before, let me see if I can do it again.

According to Google Calculator: 1 foot pound = 0.000376616097 watt hours

so, 1 foot pound = 0.000000376616097 kilowatt hours

1 foot ton = 0.000753232194 kilowatt hours

100 foot tons = 0.0753232194 kilowatt hours

100,000 foot tons = 75.3232194 kilowatt hours

How many kilowatt hours do you use in an average day? Last month I used 14.7 kWh a day, and I have a 300 square foot apartment. That's enough energy to lift 1 ton 19522 feet, or 195.22 tons 100 feet. (at an impossible 100% efficiency)

Every time I work this problem I swear I must have done something wrong, but it consistently comes out to something ridiculous like that.
Formerly something else...

Golden Applesauce

Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on October 05, 2008, 03:49:13 AM
Quote from: Felix on October 04, 2008, 07:09:18 AM
One somewhat odd idea is to have spare energy lift a heavy weight.  The weight remains suspended until energy is needed, then released on a flywheel to generate electricity.

I've done the math on this before, let me see if I can do it again.

According to Google Calculator: 1 foot pound = 0.000376616097 watt hours

so, 1 foot pound = 0.000000376616097 kilowatt hours

1 foot ton = 0.000753232194 kilowatt hours

100 foot tons = 0.0753232194 kilowatt hours

100,000 foot tons = 75.3232194 kilowatt hours

How many kilowatt hours do you use in an average day? Last month I used 14.7 kWh a day, and I have a 300 square foot apartment. That's enough energy to lift 1 ton 19522 feet, or 195.22 tons 100 feet. (at an impossible 100% efficiency)

Every time I work this problem I swear I must have done something wrong, but it consistently comes out to something ridiculous like that.

Variations on this that store energy in the difference in water levels between two connected reservoirs are in use,  I believe.
Q: How regularly do you hire 8th graders?
A: We have hired a number of FORMER 8th graders.

East Coast Hustle

yeah, it's called "hydroelectric power".
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Kai

If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water. --Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey

Her Royal Majesty's Chief of Insect Genitalia Dissection
Grand Visser of the Six Legged Class
Chanticleer of the Holometabola Clade Church, Diptera Parish

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Back in the day people had little coal-burning generators in their houses. It was very, very efficient compared to burning coal off in the country and then  trying to figure out how to transport and store the generated electricity, neither of which things we currently have the technology to do without tremendous loss.

The problem was that it made cities ungodly filthy and unhealthy places to live in, and the logical solution was to centralize electrical generation and move it out of the city.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Jasper

Quote from: Kai on October 05, 2008, 04:20:40 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 02:11:10 PM
yeah, it's called "hydroelectric power".

:lulz:

Incidentally, I had an idea.  I'm obviously no engineer, but what's stopping us from getting hydroelectric from certain city sewer systems?

Kai

Quote from: Felix on October 05, 2008, 07:12:26 PM
Quote from: Kai on October 05, 2008, 04:20:40 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on October 05, 2008, 02:11:10 PM
yeah, it's called "hydroelectric power".

:lulz:

Incidentally, I had an idea.  I'm obviously no engineer, but what's stopping us from getting hydroelectric from certain city sewer systems?

Mostly that sewage treatment already uses massive amounts of electricity for water pumping but even more so for aeration tanks, settling pools, and other aspects. Its an energy intensive process, and any down slope movement is slowed by settling pools, aeration tanks, mechanical (both passive and active) particulate removal, etc.
If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water. --Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey

Her Royal Majesty's Chief of Insect Genitalia Dissection
Grand Visser of the Six Legged Class
Chanticleer of the Holometabola Clade Church, Diptera Parish