The price of trying to go green.

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by The Enigma

@mako88sb
Did you ever wonder how much harm is done and will be done by nuclear power not only to birds but to all life on earth?

There are some great sources of green energy - but unfortunately they are significantly ignored by most eco-treehuggers. The two most popular with the general "green crowd" - solar and wind - are NOT eco friendly. Lets take a look.

Solar? Take a look at what is involved in MAKING a solar power panel. The manufacturing of the panels use all kinds of toxic chemicals, silicon, and creates a LOT of "greenhouse gases". Solar also requires batteries to store energy for non-light time usage - and batteries are BAD, ecologically speaking.

Wind? The average wind turbine is made of significantly large amounts of carbon fiber reinforced plastic. While about 5x stronger than steel - it also is extremely difficult to recycle, is very ecologically unfriendly to manufacture (because its partially PLASTIC) and then you have to factor in the reality that wind turbines kill lots of flying animals. Oh - and since wind isn't constant - neither is the energy generation provided. So it lacks efficiency and also - like solar - requires some way to store the energy it makes - when it actually makes some.....

So - what kinds of green energy is there that we need to seriously consider expanding our usage of?

Hydro-electric - using gravity and water to make da juice in da wires. Its been around for a long time, is often minimally ecologically intrusive and is very reliable (as gravity does not significantly fluctuate for the use of energy production).

Nuclear - yes our current generation of nuclear plants are wasteful. However, our reactors are old - newer reactors can actually reprocess the waste we have created in the last 50+ years and gain up to 95% of the energy still contained within it. Talk about clean - we are talking about using what was waste and making it into energy. The problem - say nuclear energy to a "greenie" and watch them have a fit that closely resembles one brought on by epilepsy. To many ecologically devout, "nuclear" = "dirty", but when you look at what we could do simply by cleaning up the mess of the last half century, it is foolish to refuse to consider this power source. Not to mention that most objections to nuclear power are based off of worst case scenario fears that reference bad engineering and known flaws that were not addressed - such as in places like Chernobyl and Fukushima. Yet they fail to note these documented shortcomings, instead claiming that it proves nuclear energy isn't safe.

There are some other sources of energy that are classified as "green". Lets examine them...

Tidal and Wave turbines - an adaptation on hydro-electric, the use of tides, currents and waves to create energy make use of existing, fairly consistent natural phenomena to make electricity. Unfortunately, this does suffer from the issue of "wildlife kills" and subsequent damage to equipment. Also - manufacturing is similar to that of wind turbines, with all the flaws of that system.

Biomass - Biological mass, meaning something that was alive but isn't now - used to generate electricity. Anything from algae to grass clippings to dead bodies of animals and potentially - even humans. Need I even point out why this is a bad idea?

CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) - Its clean during usage compared to other fossil fuels, but it still creates ecological "waste" through post-combustion gases. Add in that its not ecologically friendly during production (though it is again cleaner than existing gasoline production) and its merely a step in the right direction, but is not the end of the road.

The "ultimate" answer to our energy problems - at least for non-motive usage, is probably "Radiant Energy" - IF there could be found a way to access it in the vast amounts needed. At 1% the cost of "standard" electrical generation and no significant ecological impact in accessing it, the only issues are those of scope and education. Few people have ever even heard of radiant energy, much less understand that it can be used to accomplish things at such a significant cost reduction and no known natural impact. Until Radiant energy is generally accessible, using new technology to reprocess and clean up our nuclear mess while creating energy at the same time is the best available option for the massive and growing energy needs of society.

That does not answer energy for motive operations. Neither nuclear nor radiant energy can do that right now - nor can any other major "green" energy sources. The only real improvement overall for motive energy needs is CNG.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Wolferz

Skybird,

They do need to recoup the investment in those wind turbines and give the dirty electricity producers their cut for using their transmission lines.
Then there's the maintenance on those turbines. etc etc ad nauseum.

One would think so, yes, it sounds like the most likely and natural explanation, right?! Better think again.

The situation is much more absurd. Photovoltaic got pushed over here by subsidizing the installation of solar panels on private roofs and promising to pay private owners and companies alike a certain fee for each kW-hour produced. Those tax-payed investement subsidies for the most then were fetched by Chinese companies producing such panels, which helped them - with German tax money - to wipe the German solar panel industry off the market with cheap Chinese imports, with the German industry just some years ago having been both in quality and quantity world market leader - now, just a few years after that system was implemented by political-ideological will, practically all German solar panel producers have been destroyed, a German solar panel industry no longer exists. We subsidized the Chinese to do that to us! And we use tax money as well for making electricity needlessly more expensive the more sunny the day is!

I hate subsidies, always. They always mean to distort market mechanisms. Political regulation (planned economy) versus free market - guess my assessment the one versus the other...

Wind suffers from the same problem: subsidizing the production of wind energy; also, we do not have the infrastructure to transport the power from where it gets produced (the windy north) to the places where it is needed most: the South. According national powerlines have not been built, and we are still years away fro that. Since years we must spend millions every month to pay the maintenance of windwheels that are not linked to the powergrid, on land as well as offshore. First investors have moved out (or went bancrupt). It was all planned in total haste, for ideological reasons, and because nobody on this planet suffered so dearly from the Fukushima disaster as us poor Germans, you know.

What also helps to let costs explode for private households is that the government created many of exception rules for the industry. Almost all producing industry can get excluded fro these rises in prices for electricity. The difference - must be payed for by households to whose bills the differences from the industry get added.

They are so proud on the "deutsche Weg" (German way). Hah...! It is laughable and ridicules, a mouse that tries to roar! And not just on this question of green energy! That they seriously believe they do motivate the rest of the world to follow the German ways here, only illustrates the megalomaniac messiah syndrome they suffer from.

[Wolferz]

Originally Posted by Skybird

One would think so, yes, it sounds like the most likely and natural explanation, right?! Better think again.

The situation is much more absurd. Photovoltaic got pushed over here by subsidizing the installation of solar panels on private roofs and promising to pay private owners and companies alike a certain fee for each kW-hour produced. Those tax-payed investement subsidies for the most then were fetched by Chinese companies producing such panels, which helped them - with German tax money - to wipe the German solar panel industry off the market with cheap Chinese imports, with the German industry just some years ago having been both in quality and quantity world market leader - now, just a few years after that system was implemented by political-ideological will, practically all German solar panel producers have been destroyed, a German solar panel industry no longer exists. We subsidized the Chinese to do that to us! And we use tax money as well for making electricity needlessly more expensive the more sunny the day is!

I hate subsidies, always. They always mean to distort market mechanisms. Political regulation (planned economy) versus free market - guess my assessment the one versus the other...

Wind suffers from the same problem: subsidizing the production of wind energy; also, we do not have the infrastructure to transport the power from where it gets produced (the windy north) to the places where it is needed most: the South. According national powerlines have not been built, and we are still years away fro that. Since years we must spend millions every month to pay the maintenance of windwheels that are not linked to the powergrid, on land as well as offshore. First investors have moved out (or went bancrupt). It was all planned in total haste, for ideological reasons, and because nobody on this planet suffered so dearly from the Fukushima disaster as us poor Germans, you know.

What also helps to let costs explode for private households is that the government created many of exception rules for the industry. Almost all producing industry can get excluded fro these rises in prices for electricity. The difference - must be payed for by households to whose bills the differences from the industry get added.

They are so proud on the "deutsche Weg" (German way). Hah...! It is laughable and ridicules, a mouse that tries to roar! And not just on this question of green energy! That they seriously believe they do motivate the rest of the world to follow the German ways here, only illustrates the megalomaniac messiah syndrome they suffer from.

I concur on all points and will only add that the great western industrialized nations have been hornswoggled into giving up to China that which made us great and they used or are using government subsidies to finance it. Win win for the corporations and lose lose for the rest of us.
Now let's see what grows after they finish plowing us under. I fear that the seeds of greed will only bear the fruits of anarchy on a near global scale.

[BrucePartington]

Originally Posted by Wolferz

I concur on all points and will only add that the great western industrialized nations have been hornswoggled into giving up to China that which made us great and they used or are using government subsidies to finance it. Win win for the corporations and lose lose for the rest of us.
Now let's see what grows after they finish plowing us under. I fear that the seeds of greed will only bear the fruits of anarchy on a near global scale.

Amen to that.

I'd go even further as to say I think the real solution in the long run is for humans to start having less children, try to gradually reduce global population. Actually this is cyclically imposed on the world population, in the worst possible fashion, and "green" is the first thing to go out the window.
If there were only half of us, the pollution problem would be easier to deal with, along with other issues, such as mass unemployment world wide, and possible shortage of drinking water and food for our descendants.
The planet is finite, we cannot keep on multiplying forever. We have not yet developed 'warp drive' to enable us to....."spread to another area".

BTW, I do have a solar panel on my roof, made in Germany. And I've figured out how to recover and extend battery life. Main use of stored energy is for lighting indoors (12v LED's in all rooms), and power my laptop. I have not invested in a total independent system due to considering relocating.
I have also been toying with a brushless motor for conversion to a windmill.
Where I live, if PV production capacity is less than a Kwh, they leave you alone. Same for windmills less than 6 meters (18 ft) high.

[Wolferz]

Going green adds another problem to the mix that wasn't considered...

The creation of clouds of smug. Don't believe me? Talk to the owners of a Toyota Pious Hybrid.

[Skybird]

Bruce, you are right on population sizes, I too preach that since long. I would like to see a global population of not more than 1-1.5 billion. More this one planet cannot sustain for lasting dynamic balances of ecological give-and-take.

Getting there is a problem, though. I think man will nbot get there by regulation, but onlky by war, natural disaster, mass starevations and epidemic diseases. In other words: man will get there only by "natural" means. Sounds cynic, but is not meant cynically. Ma's attempts to tackle the problems and rescue all those hungry people, will worsen the situation until it goes beyond control.

The second big thing beside population control that must be achieved is to destroy the state-monopoly on money. If money again becomes a resource of real value and thus limited availability, the spending frenzies of politicians and the endless wishes of the electorate that they bribe to elect them, necessarily will come to an end and will get reduced to sustainable levels all by themselves. Real money< got destroyed and replaced with worthless paper money in order to enable politicians to not be limited in their spending desires. In a simulation game, it would be considered an infinite-money-cheat. Politicians must be prevented at all cost to regulate money, for a real money and where it goes and what it does is a indicator for the political acting of a state. That is the reason why they desperately try to regulate money: to hide their own mismanagement and crimes. Politicians must be prevented to print money just as much as they need new chips. They must be stopped and prevented from that at all costs. Paper money must get destroyed. It is a cheat - and a cheat with very disastrous side effects. Needless to say: the central banks thus have to be destroyed as well. Without paper money there is no need for them anymore anyway. Their only purpose is top regulate money and to print it as needed by politicians.

And the third necessity on my list: Western people must understand again that freedom is not to be sacrificed for social equality, that nature does not know a concept of everything being "equal", and that justice and social equality are two totally different things. The same law for everybody: yes. Everybody being made equal by taking from the one and giving to the other: no. People should not be given money (that got stolen from the few) and according to their needs, but they should have the right to earn according to their ability.

We strangle ourselves but wanting to regulate all and everything. Nature. Freedom. Social status. Inbred abilities and disabilities. Economy. Thinking. Risk assessment. Economic enterprise. What we achieve is that we discourage the talent, and that we turn handicaps into the norm, that we get fixated on compensating our weaknesses and over that lose our strengths and do not improve them. By that we finally fail for our own home-made mediocrity.

[BrucePartington]

Indeed Sky.
Presently there is obsessive emphasis on KPI, and near drone-like efficiency. The Human factor is deliberately left out, pointed out as a flaw in the system that needs purging.
Talent and kindness are ridiculed. Taking time to relax, sip some tea and think about things is laughed at, a thing for fools.
I think this is a by-product of the dashing lifestyle in the big cities. CEO's, lawyers, office clerks, all scrambling to prove their worth and to back-stab their colleagues. It's called 'competitiveness'.
Life in this environment is so fast, that people don't realize any more they lost perspective.
IMHO, this comes from too much competition, a consequence of over-crowdedness.
From this I am not surprised we are now considered just a Social Security Number, mere statistics, totally devoid of humanity.
For politicians we are mere 'voters'.
This ferocity is not so prevalent in smaller communities. I'm not saying the predators have no teeth in smaller communities, only they try to refrain a bit more.

In smaller communities they all know each other, and no one can hide behind anonymity. In big cities, we are all anonymous, and therefore non-humans, or considered as such.

We see this in all those wildlife documentaries on tv. Whenever a species overpopulates a given habitat, or a family gets too big, fights break out between them.

I will not extend this. You got the picture.

[mapuc]

What ever we want it or not we have to find a substitute to our oil and coal, they will not last forever.

We can go on as nothing is going to happen. One day though this is what is going to happen or could happen.



So instead of just sit there and do nothing and wait until this huge bill arrives, because we have neglected what we knew would come, we could start invest and do a lot of science in alternative fuel.

Markus

[Wolferz]

Suffice it to say that when the oil runs dry we won't have to worry about greenhouse gasses warming the planet anymore.

[BrucePartington]

I believe this has some bearing on what is being discussed.
Enjoy.

[Betonov]

David Attenborough, this will be good
Thanks

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

No idea really.

A link to a reputable source would be nice.

THere's one at Chernobyl