nuclear energy

[wellard]

Originally Posted by Rikard T'Aranaxz fusion is the way to go

Secretmaster also mentioned fusion

Can anybody link me to a good (understandable) explanation as to it's process and it's benefits / problems?

[SpiritWarrior]

Originally Posted by wellard The problem is, and has been for decades, the costing, Spirit Warrior. People want this type of energy but the reliability and efficiency has always been overstated and is frankly way off the mark even now. Big business would be all over this like a rash if there was even a sniff of long term success but the truth is that until the cost of proven reliable coal powered central grid type power systems increases vastly then unfortunately it is a no go situation. ...... Unless there have been massive breakthrough's in technology that I have missed in the last year or so.

I hear this from time to time, I think alot of it is propaganda pumped out there by special interests to be honest with you. The way universal healthcare was defeated in the 90's.

We don't need to know everything about the technology to make a rational assessment. When in doubt go back to basics. For example. A person turning a rotating lever can generate electricity that is storable in a battery. A windmill can turn a giant version of that lever and generate a large(r) amount of the same electricity which can also be stored, but the windmill never gets tired and turns all day. All it needs is maintaneance from time to time. It doesn't need to rest or sleep or eat. It also doesn't need to be paid (which might put our man out of a job).

Yes, we would absolutely need to build the windmill first, starting from the bottom up, but in the long run the gains far outweigh any problems we have. This source of power is self sustaining and self renewable. If we can go from single to quad cores in the space of a few years, we most certainly can make strides in this area. I think intentional misinformation is the main issue, resulting in lack of incentive and/or fear as to whether the technology even works. Please, of course it works. Our watches and calculators have been solar powered since the 80's, our traffic lights are too nowadays. Why can we not build these things on a macro scale when the schematics are the exact same? Even if the technology cost more than it should, it still pays for itself after a few years. As in free electricity forever.

[Lord of Alcohol]

No matter what type of energy you put up environmentalists will protest while driving their cars to work and protests, using their cell phone and computers to protest, all the while staying alive with food made the the use of power, homes made with the use of power, their jobs made possible with the use of power. Environmentalists are the biggest hypocrites on this planet.

Coal plants-greenhouse gas
Nuclear plants-waste/danger
Windmill power-landscape pollution/kill birds
Solar power-landscape pollution/I'm sure theres more

So sure you could increase the technology of any of these types of power which would cost billions only to have a 20 year court fight costing billions all the while continuing research costing billions.

I would like to see environmetal groups have their power shut off to their offices and members. Lets those geniuses figure out how to power up in the winter.

That being said I am anti-coal plants and if ruining my view a bit is the price then I think I can take it. Unfortunatly the theres the "I'm ok with anything just not in my back yard" bunch. So yep no matter what, we are fucked.

[Dron_Cah]

Well, I'm certainly no expert, but I'll say what I said in another conversation with the same topic. Using solar and wind power is just not possible right now. We cannot produce the kind of energy we need at this time, with just those sources. And sadly, it may not "just be a matter of time" before these things become efficient enough to use as our primary source of energy. I think we tend to think its just a matter of not enough money in funding or propaganda that keeps these sources from replacing nonrenewable forms, but tell that to the scientists researching it! They're the ones having to make breakthroughs, having to make a system more efficient after they've already optimized it as well as they know how. Frankly, we don't know that these sources are going to become efficient enough to produce all of our energy. Am I saying they wont? No, of course not! I'm just saying that it would be extremely risky for us to depend on these sources and their development, and even more risky for energy companies to invest in them too much.
I'm afraid we're painting the picture with broad strokes, depicting nonrenewable sources as stupid and infinitely inferior to renewable ones, when in fact, they are not. I hope someday they are, so I don't have to pay the jillion dollars a gallon for gas, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Rikard T'Aranaxz]

Originally Posted by wellard Secretmaster also mentioned fusion Can anybody link me to a good (understandable) explanation as to it's process and it's benefits / problems?

the process is simple. You fuse 4 hydrogen atoms into 1 helium atom. The benefits are that hydrogen is plenty available, the waste product is helium, which is non-toxic and non-radioactive. It is the most efficient way of extracting energy, except prehaps for accretion which we cant do on earth.

The problems are technology, for now the power we need to get fusion to start (which requires a temperature of over 1million K) is more then we get out of it.

The wikipedia page on fusion power is quite usefull for the layman.

[SpiritWarrior]

Originally Posted by Dron_Cah Well, I'm certainly no expert, but I'll say what I said in another conversation with the same topic. Using solar and wind power is just not possible right now. We cannot produce the kind of energy we need at this time, with just those sources. And sadly, it may not "just be a matter of time" before these things become efficient enough to use as our primary source of energy. I think we tend to think its just a matter of not enough money in funding or propaganda that keeps these sources from replacing nonrenewable forms, but tell that to the scientists researching it! They're the ones having to make breakthroughs, having to make a system more efficient after they've already optimized it as well as they know how. Frankly, we don't know that these sources are going to become efficient enough to produce all of our energy. Am I saying they wont? No, of course not! I'm just saying that it would be extremely risky for us to depend on these sources and their development, and even more risky for energy companies to invest in them too much. I'm afraid we're painting the picture with broad strokes, depicting nonrenewable sources as stupid and infinitely inferior to renewable ones, when in fact, they are not. I hope someday they are, so I don't have to pay the jillion dollars a gallon for gas, but I'm not holding my breath.

While your argument may have merit, this could be the attitude that is actually holding us back you see. I think it is indeed a "matter of time" before we see this everywhere. Inevitable part of the future IMO, just depends on whether it's sooner rather than later. Why not be optimistic about the concept of clean, renewable energy? Can you think of a better goal to shoot for? You don't have to hold your breath in order to attain positive change, it usually happens gradually over time but eventually people can envision it no other way.

[SilentThief]

I work for a company that supplies energy to residential customers, and I'll tell you that that side of it makes me think there is a lot of dirt in the energy industry. First off, there seems to not be a lot of regulation of the industry at least from the customers viewpoint (some get "slammed" or switched to another company without consent)

In addition, the rates for providing energy to your home (at least in the market we supply to) has more than doubled since 2 years ago, and shows no sign of backing down. With the price rate increase for keeping your house warm in the winter or not boiling in the summer, as well as huge prices for gas, not to mention the price increase for everything else that happens to be shipped somewhere by a vehicle that runs on gas, we are looking at a potential crisis in the near future.

We desperately need an answer to the question "what are we going to do for our energy/fuel?" As our current administration has a energy policy that is narrow minded (to put it politely)

As for green energy, like solar and wind; it happens to cost a little more due to gas/coal being so entrenched in our energy production. It would be nice to switch to green so as to not pollute (especially our drinking water), but everyone would have to embrace it rather than giving it just a cursory glance.

ST

[Carson Drayke]

Utilities sponsor thorough cost/return analysis before they ever build a plant. If it were economically viable over a 30 year life cycle for them to go more toward renewables, profits would push them to. Not to say it shouldn't be done, just that it takes a concerted goverment effort to push it, as the hike in electric bills, etc. that will come of it is not popular, and can only be offset by more money into extensive infrastructure, research, and development.

Renewables are not a panacea. The battery room to supply just the relatively small amount of power storage to get a plant up and running is massive, expensive, and very hazardous (bad combination of lots of acid and the potential for explosion). To extend that storage system to feed a city when wind/sun is not cutting it isn't just a matter of scale, a whole new system will need to be devised.

Nuclear is a nice option, but it takes 10-15 years to get a plant built and running, and nuclear fuel is not a renewable resource, aside from the obvious disposal problems.

I've seen statistics on the number of power plants of various types that would need to be built over the next 30 years to meet America's projected power needs and any combination is daunting. With the delays in the market while we try to sort it all out, we're going to be hurting in the future trying to catch up to demand any way we can.

[wellard]

Originally Posted by Rikard T'Aranaxz The wikipedia page on fusion power is quite usefull for the layman.

THX I should of thought of that ...

Interesting! and there is a massive amount of money being pushed into this research (though the USA seems to have pulled out .. nice one Bush ) The trouble is even if the next stage of research is a success power plants are still 25 years away at best.

So in the meantime ????

[Luvian]

I think the biggest problem is that the oil companies have lobbying against other energy sources for decades (you can't really blame them for wanting protect their market) and the side effect of this is we have advanced in decades as far as other energy sources goes.

People are just now starting to give serious thoughts about alternate sources now that *gasp!* we may actually run out of resources. Well it's too little too late. They went for the short term and now it's going to cost us because we're not prepared.

Over here in Quebec we have been relying mostly on Hydroelectricity and we actually have some electrically powered cars so I'm not too worried for the future since we seem to one step ahead, but things will definitely get worse before they get better.