Europe Turns Back to Coal, Raising Climate Fears

[bradclark1]

Wind and sun are fine for supplying that little bit so the people who can afford it can feel better. The only affordable, logical way at the present time is nuclear. Put a lot of government and private sector emphasis on research of better ways for waste storage or disposal.
At the present time the only truly workable choices are clean coal technology or nuclear. Everything else is wishful thinking. I can't see 100 square miles of solar panels or wind farms outside of every small to medium city being a realistic choice.

[Tchocky]

Not sure about that "little bit", Brad. A few weeks ago wind power supplied 40% of Spain's electricity needs. But you're right in that wind is limited in continuous generation and variable demand generation. These problems can be somewhat alleviated through grid modernising and storage capacity.

On a slightly related note, wind power in my home town made the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/09/te...al/09town.html

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

Not quite, jackass. See my above post. There's some information about nuclear waste and nuclear waste dumping. Rumors also state that the moon has been seen as a possible nuclear waste dump (Google it).

And also note that nuclear power is safe... as long as you don't count on mishaps and mistakes. Chernobyl ring a bell? How about Three-Mile Island? Three-Mile Island was prevented, but if it wasn't stopped in time... it could have been a catastrophe. Chernobyl... well, we all know the story. Mass radioactivity all over the area and sickness from it. Horrible deaths from the radiation, and the crap that remained floating around in the atmosphere long after the event.

Wind power damaging wildlife? Mm, yes. Might we see evidence of damage to wildlife (don't give me any of that "Birds Are Hitting the Fans" crap). Well, if that's the case, move them out into the ocean (and this has been done before, by the way, quite successfully). Not much problem now, now is there? I mean, unless you're concerned about fish and the possibility of them colliding with the beam that descends into the deep. Although, the only problem you're faced with then is the rich complaining that the mills are blocking their view.

And you're right. We shouldn't just dream... we should get off our sodding asses and start focusing less and less on what's going to make us more money and start focusing more and more on what's going to keep the Earth intact for future generations.

My, my. I never knew this forum had so many opinionated little twits on it. Quite the bees, aren't we? Spoil your sweets and we'll be attacked.

Where in those links does it say that most American nuclear power plants dump their waste in the ocean and start floating there?
If you know how different nuclear power plants work, you understand that Chernobyl or Harrisburg type incidetns arent possible in Finnish reactors. Especially Chernobyl, the accident was a metafor for the whole USSR. Who the hell wants to look at thousands of windmills and solar panels? Its not just rich people, in here ordinary people can afford a wiew, i would like to keep it that way.
And you could start getting yourself together. One day you are a muslim next an atheist, then a conservative and next a socialist etc..
Your 19? Right?:rotfl:

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Not sure about that "little bit", Brad. A few weeks ago wind power supplied 40% of Spain's electricity needs. But you're right in that wind is limited in continuous generation and variable demand generation. These problems can be somewhat alleviated through grid modernising and storage capacity.

On a slightly related note, wind power in my home town made the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/09/te...al/09town.html

The population of Spain is approximately 40 million with an overall density of 206 per square mile.
USA population of 299 million with an overall density of 80 people per square mile. This ranges from average 703 per mile in Connecticut to 10 in South Dakota. There are states with less and more than what I've shown.
Overall I would say that the Midwest more or less could benefit from solar or wind power, but the Mideast, East, California and parts of Oregon because of population density would mainly benefit from nuclear I would think. Excess energy could probably even be bought from the Midwest. That being said however, solar and wind power generation is good bit more expensive than coal or nuclear generation.
Might be getting time to check the stock market for companies that are solar and wind manufacturers and buy cheap (as if I could afford it).

[August]

Wind and especially solar technology have come a long way in the past 20 years. I'm betting that before much longer they will become commercially viable.

[Sldghammer]

One of the big problems with wind generation - happens fairly often.
No wind, no power.

WIND April 24, 2008
MCR - Maximum Continuous Rating
TNG - Total Net Generation
DCR - Dispatched Contingency Reserve
MCR TNG DCR
Castle River #1 40 0 0
Cowley Ridge 38 0 0
Enmax Taber 81 0 0
Kettles Hill 63 0 0
McBride Lake Windfarm 75 0 0
Soderglen Wind 68.3 0 0
Summerview 68.4 0 0
Suncor Chin Chute 30 0 0
Suncor Magrath 30 0 0
Taylor Wind Farm 3.6 0 0

[Ishmael]

Has anybody read any of this guy's work?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O%27Neill

He was a pioneer in the research and feasibility of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_satellite

This is a great article explaining the advantages and disadvantages of a fully-deployed SPS system. Considering the thousands of square miles of desert land in the Southwest for siting rectennas, combined with the increase in available solar energy outside the atmosphere and the advances in thin-film semiconductor processing in the last 40 years, an orbital PV or CPV system might be even more feasible today. This would also facilitate the permanent human presence in space and lead to the construction of orbital space colonies as envisioned by O'Neill here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Neill_Cylinder

[August]

Rose and I are banking on solar technology improving to the point it's feasable to run our retirement home in 20 years. Maybe it will just be a rectenna.

[TheSatyr]

Typical human behavior. Destroy the desert's ecological system in order to put in hundreds if not thousands of solar panels,when using nuclear or clean coal would cause alot less ecological damage.

How many desert animal species are the solar panel enthusiasts willing to kill off just to prove that solar power isn't cost effective?

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Originally Posted by August

Wind and especially solar technology have come a long way in the past 20 years. I'm betting that before much longer they will become commercially viable.

Weren't there ideas proposed about building windfarms in the sea?

[August]

Originally Posted by Kapitan_Phillips

Weren't there ideas proposed about building windfarms in the sea?

Yeah they want to build one up this way off Nantucket. Common wisdom is it will never happen as long as it spoils the view from the Kennedy Compound on Cape Cod.

As I mentioned earlier I have looked a bit into alternate ways of creating my own electricity for our retirement home. At the moment the choices seem to be limited to solar and wind, but of the two, solar power is a heckuva lot less maintenance intensive.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Kapitan_Phillips

Weren't there ideas proposed about building windfarms in the sea?

Yup, there's a 25MW farm operating 10km off the Arklow coast, about 60 miles south of me, pretty to watch.
As long as the seabed is shallow and strong, there's no real problem.

@ August - I remember being bothered by Cape Wind canvassers on Boston Common. Just build it already! Never mind Ted's objections..

Does anyone here actually believe wind turbines spoil scenery? I love them!

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

@ August - I remember being bothered by Cape Wind canvassers on Boston Common. Just build it already! Never mind Ted's objections..

Does anyone here actually believe wind turbines spoil scenery? I love them!

There's a fair amount of NIMBY bandwagoning going on. The latest excuse to stop progress is the poor endangered birdies will get chopped up by the spinning blades (which does happen i suppose).

[Tchocky]

...swear to preserve, protect, and defend high property prices. The creed of NIMBY

Birds do get chewed up by turbines, yeah. A major development off the Scottish Hebrides was just cancelled because of such concerns. I guess one has to site the farms where the least damage will be done, although I imagine it's impossible to avoid it entirely.

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

...swear to preserve, protect, and defend high property prices. The creed of NIMBY

Birds do get chewed up by turbines, yeah. A major development off the Scottish Hebrides was just cancelled because of such concerns. I guess one has to site the farms where the least damage will be done, although I imagine it's impossible to avoid it entirely.

ATM for the retirement home my money is on solar power. I figure that 20 years from now the technology should have advanced to the point i can be electrically self sufficient, maybe even make a little selling the extra back to the power company, without it costing me an arm and a leg to build it.