Solar Pipe Dream

Yamu

Le Fromage Vieux oTO
Moderator
Board Cop oTO
Orderite
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-00 AT 01:48PM (GMT)[p]Why, when I get into debates over the crappy state of the world as I tend to do, do people always throw solar power in my face as a viable alternative to the energy sources that are currently most widely employed?

True, creating power with nuclear fission or by burning fossil fuels wastes resources and produces pollutants, but there's something that the new-age grease sponges I'm so used to dealing with don't seem to have figured out:

So does solar.

Sure, most people (at least most that I talk to) look at is as solar pannels creating energy without polluting, and doing it from a resource in infinite supply (or finite, but it'll hold out for another few billion years)

This is the way it really is:

The process is wasteless, but those solar pannels have to come from somewhere. They are comprised of materials, some rare, that must be mined. Now, that process alone, while a necessary evil in today's society, can be pollutant and can seriously fuck with nature. Then, they have to be made. In factories. Great, polluting factories.

Now, that may not seem like much, but consider that there needs to be enough nature-gouging mining and polluting factories to make enough solar pannels to power the entire world, or at least a percentage of it significant enough to make a difference. Now, if a pannel wears out, or if power demand increases (two things that weather, accidents, and a growing and technologically advancing society are sure to take care of), more pannels must be made. That's a whole lotta manufacturing.

Now, while I am by far not an advocate of current systems (Chernobyl, anyone?), I really don't think that solar is any more workable a solution than the others.

Well, sorry, had to rant about something
 
How about hydro power? It powers one freaking hundred percent of Norway, still the air isn't as transparent as you'd think.
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-17-00 AT 00:45AM (GMT)[p]>Come on. Seriously. There's plenty of
>better ranting topics than
>solar power


Well, sorry. I had just come home from a debate in school about power in which my entire science class had turned against me. Then , just because the universe hates me, when I got home there was some nut on T.V. talking about just how much solar power would improve the state of things. That was when I decided that this lunatic's voice would not go unheard... :P

And, in regards to Rune's comment about hydroelectric stations, yes, those or geothermal power would be an ideal solution, but for the fact that they are not widely avaliable. Not every place has a water source that is suited to provide power. Besides, hydroelectric damming can ruin ecosystems, and we've seen it happen more than once.

Besides, of course the pollution from power is only a small percentage of the whole smelly mess. (Oh, unless, of course, you take into account gas-powered automobiles, which also burn fossil fuels for power and subsequently pollute the air.)

-Yamu

KNEEL BEFORE MY AWESOME POWER, MORTAL! Please? Pretty please?
 
>And, in regards to Rune's comment about hydroelectric stations, yes, those or geothermal power would be an ideal solution, but for the fact that they are not widely avaliable. Not every place has a water source that is suited to provide power. Besides, hydroelectric damming can ruin ecosystems, and we've seen it happen more than once.
>

Quebec is powered by hydroelectricity (almost) only. And it gets really cold in here (-25 degrees celcius right now). Geothermal is also a viable source if you can have the ressource.
As you mention not everybody has a water supply big enough to support hydroelectric of geothermal. Wind can also back up your energy supply, but i dont think it can be used as a primary source, maybe near the coast where it's almost always windy.
As for dams ruining ecosystem, it's true but you have to see it as the least of two evils and within a generation those flood lakes become ecosystems of their own.

"I'm Ugly and I AM CANADIAN!"
http://www.iam.ca/images/iam.ca_logo.gif
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
 
>Well, sorry. I had just come
>home from a debate in
>school about power in which
>my entire science class had
>turned against me. Then ,
>just because the universe hates
>me, when I got home
>there was some nut on
>T.V. talking about just how
>much solar power would improve
>the state of things. That
>was when I decided that
>this lunatic's voice would not
>go unheard... :P
>
>And, in regards to Rune's comment
>about hydroelectric stations, yes, those
>or geothermal power would be
>an ideal solution, but for
>the fact that they are
>not widely avaliable. Not every
>place has a water source
>that is suited to provide
>power. Besides, hydroelectric damming can
>ruin ecosystems, and we've seen
>it happen more than once.

Nuclear power is the only way to go. It provides TONS of power, it's portable to anywhere in the world, and if run right, proves to have as low a chance of having a meltdown as a hydroelectric dam bursting.

People like believing the propaganda about nuclear waste. Unless you're living with the Soviets, nearly all governments go the *extra mile* to prevent any nuclear waste from leaking out. People have gone through the trouble to think up ways to prevent primitives in the future from digging up nuclear waste sites (valley of needles, etc.), if there be no person to tell them it is hazardous. Nuclear meltdowns occured when *people* screwed up, not the nuclear reactors. Chernobyl exploded because the technicians forgot to fill up the cooling system with water.

Nuclear power is just about the cleanest source of power you can get. Get this: a golf-ball sized chunk of uranium is equivilent to twenty train-cars of coal. France has met the problem with reducing nuclear waste by recycling it, recapturing 97% of the spent plutonium. The United States regrettibly does not allow nuclear waste recycling, probably because of fear that the plutonium will somehow make it into the hands of terrorists. Nuclear waste recycling is also an expensive process, usually more than buying nuclear fuel.

But the recent methods to bury nuclear waste now cost more than it would to recycle it. The United States's "safe" method of waste disposal is to mix high level nuclear waste in liquid form and mix it into black glass, that, while it doesn't reduce the radioactivity, it makes it more stable. Then they're put into stainless steel holders and buried five miles under a mountain in the middle of Nevada.

It's all because of this nuclear scare here. People don't realize that nuclear radiation doesn't glow, that the power it gives off, if controlled if a wonderful source of energy, that the public has met more radiation from the nuclear tests of the 1960s than any nuclear reactor, and that nuclear waste can be recycled so we don't have to spend $5 billion dollars to dispose of it.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Rhymes with Snuclear...

Yes, I agree strongly that nuclear, by itself, is the safest way to go. The fact remains, however, that humans run the power, and where humans are a factor, it is a given that there will inevitably be human error. I also agree that the greater percent of the United States need to get their facts straight on nuclear power. While it can be potentially dangerous, it is not some be-all and end-all armageddon if there is a small accident. People who were just a couple of miles from ground zero at Hiroshima got off with mild radiation poisoning, from which many recovered fully within a matter of weeks.

And, in regards to the thing about radiation glowing, I think that whole urban legend got started due to the mild blue glow of an out of control uranium reaction.

-Yamu

KNEEL BEFORE MY AWESOME POWER, MORTAL! Please? Pretty please?
 
>People have gone through the
>trouble to think up ways
>to prevent primitives in the
>future from digging up nuclear
>waste sites (valley of needles,
>etc.), if there be no
>person to tell them it
>is hazardous.

Primitives in the future?
Also, I wonder how could primitives dig up something located at a depth of I-don't-remember-how-many miles in a concrete bunker? With their digging clubs?



>Nuclear meltdowns
>occured when *people* screwed up,
>not the nuclear reactors.
True.


>Chernobyl exploded because the technicians
>forgot to fill up the
>cooling system with water.
What?! Who told you that bullshit?


~Dr. W95
the Super-Puper Admin
http://www.thevats.f2s.com
 
>>Chernobyl exploded because the technicians
>>forgot to fill up the
>>cooling system with water.
>What?! Who told you that bullshit?

Ah, you're right. I heard that from a friend.. but now that I think about it, he's not exactly one to trust on stuff like this.

Anyway, I guess it was the byproduct of an experiment gone wrong and a safety measure that actually had bad results.

Read about it at http://www.ans.neep.wisc.edu/~ans/point_source/AEI/apr96/Chernobyl.html

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Well, you could have solar power in orbit, that would produce a lot more energy.
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-17-00 AT 03:26PM (GMT)[p]Hmm, nuclear power, eh? Interesting stuff. So's all of quantum physics and so forth. I managed to find this whopping great big book on it. I dunno, I just like really, really small things. And I don't mean that the way SOME people would think.

http://fallout.gamestats.com/forum/User_files/3a0b90891508bbb2.jpg

"I cannot believe the theory of relativity just as I cannot believe in the existence of atoms ond such other dogmas"
 
just to mention

ehh.....in Norway it has been developed a new kind off energi. salt-force or something and all you need is a river that goes out inn salt water.

just thought i would mention it.
 
RE: just to mention

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-17-00 AT 08:20PM (GMT)[p]Sounds interesting, and somwhat promising. Once again, though, the power is limited to specific areas that posess the resource to be harnessed, and to where it can be cost-effectively conducted to.

-Yamu

KNEEL BEFORE MY AWESOME POWER, MORTAL! Please? Pretty please?
 
RE: just to mention

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-18-00 AT 06:11PM (GMT)[p]In Japan they actually use bio energy from human septic to heat up their houses... or something like that.
 
RE: just to mention

What about poop? I know it sounds like crap (literaly) but all the shit we poop out everyday could support us with a LOT of methane gas. But I don't know how good it is for the enviroment. I've heard that on of the biggest problems with the ozone layer was that all the cows in the world farted to much and thus let out a lot of methane. But anywho, methane powerplants are relatively safe (maybe flammable) and cheap.

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]

"Call me a vagabond, and I'll smile. Call me a thief, and I'll laugh. Call me a liar, and I feed you your liver."
 
RE: just to mention

>What about poop? I know it
>sounds like crap (literaly) but
>all the shit we poop
>out everyday could support us
>with a LOT of methane
>gas. But I don't know
>how good it is for
>the enviroment. I've heard that
>on of the biggest problems
>with the ozone layer was
>that all the cows in
>the world farted to much
>and thus let out a
>lot of methane. But anywho,
>methane powerplants are relatively safe
>(maybe flammable) and cheap.

Well, when you've devised a viable way to extract methane from human and cow asses to power the world, I'll give my vote for you to get the Nobel Prize.

Actually, there is more methane contained in the soil under the ocean than all other fossil fuels on or in the planet in history combined. The only problem is that it is hard to extract it, so this may be the new energy source.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Fusion power

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-31-00 AT 05:07PM (GMT)[p]On fusion power: I think it's practically impossible to do.

Seeing as the nuclear power we have today isn't really fission power in the sense of atomic explosions inside the nuclear plant. Today's nuclear power is just based on radioactive isotopes heating up water, like any fossil fuel plant, only that the radioactives last much longer and give more output.

True fusion power (contained and absorbed h-bombs) just won't work. Fission power isn't the right term for nuclear power, as there are no nuclear fissures anywhere.

----
RUNE, the Arch-Norwegian
----

Bush is a chick
Albright's a guy
This poem is sick
And so am I
 
RE: just to mention

I don't think it's so hard to extract it. Farts is methane, more or less. I know of a pig farmer who uses pig-shit to power his farm. He has a methane power plant. I don't know exactly how it works. But the only problem was that the pressure in the shit tank could get to high and it could explode. Would look like Modoc then, wouldn't it?

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]

"Call me a vagabond, and I'll smile. Call me a thief, and I'll laugh. Call me a liar, and I feed you your liver."
 
Back
Top