"If we cannot put solar power plants in the Mojave desert...

[balli]

If you look around the world..you'll notice most countries with high amounts nuclear power don't need large depositories. They have fuel recycling plants.

Well then build em, in Nevada, or don't, but I'm 100% on the nuclear bandwagon. I don't care whether we bury the waste, recycle it, or whatever the else gets done with it, I just want a means for its disposal. Nuclear waste IMO is one of those good problems.

I don't knock Obama for much and I'm no scholar on the matter, but his ties to the coal industry bother me. I have no idea what amount stimulus funding, if any, is geared towards nuclear power, but I doubt there's much.

[Drachen]

I know that this idea may seem a little sci fi but its an idea that just popped into my head. One poster on this page asked what would eventually become the dominant player in energy and one of the options was "something I haven't thought of yet." What do yall think about the possibility of somehow harnessing the energy produced by photosynthesis in plants to power our needs? (not biofuels, but figuring out some synthetic version of photosynthesis to create energy). Like I said, very sci fi and in the future and all, but I just thought I would throw that idea out there to the general public to see what you think.

[coyotes_geek]

Is that per square meter? Square foot? Square yard?

I'm assuming since science is metric, the general convention would mean 3 kw per square meter. Still, that would be at near 0% humidity and perpendicular to the sun. The solar power varies from 1363 to 1367 watts per meter just outside our atmosphere and about 69% of this makes it to the surface, only about half on average weather conditions. If we use 69% of 1365 watts = 942 watts then 3 watts is still only 3.2% efficient. Granted, that's far more than the approximate 2% of older solar cells.

How much do these cost?

I was about to put a 3kw solar array on my roof last year and I want to say that it was going to take about 280 square feet of panels. Total installed cost was going to be around $25,000.

[LnGrrrR]

Good question. Long-term, probably some sort of fusion, and this will be either late in my life or after I am dead.

It will end up being some combination of several forms. Renewables will have to pick up much of the slack in my lifetime, and some form of oil made from algae.

Quite frankly I could see some form of space-based power ending up as donig the trick, as the restrictions on pure space and/or environmental concerns would be non-existant.

The sun puts out more energy in 2 seconds than we have ever used as a species, and building a power array a few hundred miles across would be feasible.

Like a Dyson sphere? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

[LnGrrrR]

Biofuel is not a very good option at all. 1. it's extremely inefficient 2. it kills crop prices around the world, especially in poorer countries. 3. It has nasty emissions. 4. It would be too difficult at this point to change our industry completely to biofuels.

I was thinking more along the lines of methane capturing and things of that nature, rather than ethanol. Do the former have the same problems as the latter?

[Vici]

Read the OP. Store energy in the form of molten salt, heated by solar concentration. Pump molten salt through a conventional steam boiler to generate electricty at night.



Spanish thermal solar plant.

I was thinking along the lines of personal solar when it comes to storing energy. I would think the goal would be to power your own place for free once you've installed solar panels. The same with your car. Can you use molten salt at a personal residence? If you show me which you're talking about I'll read it on my own.

[Wild Cobra]

So, to the energy experts... what will eventually take over as the dominant form of energy, do you think? Just take an educated guess.

Solar?

Maybe, but unlikely. There is a tremendous amount of enrgy in sunlight. The problem is converting it. I find it unlikely we will ever convert it efficiently enough to be other than a minor player. I think the best use we will have is in building designs themselves, that will harness the heat in the winter and reflect it it the summer.

Windpower?

Never. If we could harness enough of the wind for power generation, we would alter nature too much.

Nuclear?

This is our best current means, if we could just get past the green weenies.

Biofuel?

I see a fair chance of this becoming a major player, but I don't think it will be dominant. Researchers are working on converting waste to usable fuels. In theory, the waste we generate can be converted to a tremendous amount of power. It's just a matter of getting all the pieces to work.

Or some other source I haven't thought of?

We have thought of Cold Fusion. This is my personal favorite. Years ago, I though we would be making progress by now. I hope we have and it's just under wraps. There are cold fusion generators that work on small scales, but nothing even close to cost effective.

Maybe we can learn how to build ZPM's?

[LnGrrrR]

I know, I've worked with all types of Solar concentrators. I have an engine powered from a light bulb in my office. I've even overlooked proposals to used pressurized air in underground caverns to store the energy. The efficiency from just about all of them are garbage, there are a lot of transfer losses involved that hardly anyone talks about.

This might sound stupid, but I have no dealings with this type of stuff in my job, so...

Let's assume that we can't seem to get around oil/coal due to the superior efficiency. Is there any way we could manufacture a similar/synthetic substance without using more energy than we would get back to produce it? Or is our only option just waiting a few hundred thousand years for some more fossil fuel?

[Vici]

Absolutely, although your insurance, fire department, LE agency or HOA may say otherwise.

You might want to look up the characteristics of molten sodium before you try it.

Well that's kind of what I was hinting at lol. The goal of solar is complete self sustainability.

I was thinking more along the lines of methane capturing and things of that nature, rather than ethanol. Do the former have the same problems as the latter?

I honestly don't know enough about methane as an energy source to make any form of opinion. However I do remember this http://www.azocleantech.com/Details.asp?NewsID=273 . It's an interesting idea.

I also came across this short article http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009...or-storage.php which would actually answer my personal storage question. It's possible, just not ready yet.

I know that this idea may seem a little sci fi but its an idea that just popped into my head. One poster on this page asked what would eventually become the dominant player in energy and one of the options was "something I haven't thought of yet." What do yall think about the possibility of somehow harnessing the energy produced by photosynthesis in plants to power our needs? (not biofuels, but figuring out some synthetic version of photosynthesis to create energy). Like I said, very sci fi and in the future and all, but I just thought I would throw that idea out there to the general public to see what you think.

It's a biologists wet dream, trust me. I've had countless discussions about this, it's just very hard to do lol.

[Drachen]

Well that's kind of what I was hinting at lol. The goal of solar is complete self sustainability.




I honestly don't know enough about methane as an energy source to make any form of opinion. However I do remember this http://www.azocleantech.com/Details.asp?NewsID=273 . It's an interesting idea.

I also came across this short article http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009...or-storage.php which would actually answer my personal storage question. It's possible, just not ready yet.



It's a biologists wet dream, trust me. I've had countless discussions about this, it's just very hard to do lol.

Is it that we just don't know enough about how the photosynthesis process works? Or is it that we cant figure out how to tap into the energy produced?

[coyotes_geek]

I honestly don't know enough about methane as an energy source to make any form of opinion. However I do remember this http://www.azocleantech.com/Details.asp?NewsID=273 . It's an interesting idea.

I also came across this short article http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009...or-storage.php which would actually answer my personal storage question. It's possible, just not ready yet.

I know there are some landfills out there that have developed relatively efficient methane recovery systems. I don't think there's any way for those to be used on a large enough scale to be considered a viable alternative, but it is possible to recover enough methane to cover your costs. Every little bit helps.

[Wild Cobra]

I was about to put a 3kw solar array on my roof last year and I want to say that it was going to take about 280 square feet of panels. Total installed cost was going to be around $25,000.

Well, depending on where you are and the angle of the sun, etc.

280 sq ft = 26 sq meters. Conventional solar cells only get about 1 kw per meter at full direct sunlight. If you live say in San Antonio with a roof pitch of 30 degrees and facing due south, then you have nearly full power at noon during the equinox. Summer solstice noon power will be at 99.4% and winter solstice noon at 83.9%. Now with fixed solar cells perpendicular to the noon sun, they will recieve 0% power at 6 AM and 6 PM. The daily average becomes about 29% in the summer and 24.5% in the winter. If calculated at the winter average, 24.5% of 26 watts is only 6.37 watts. Now consider average cloud cover, humidity, etc... That 6.37 watts is under optimum conditions under the conditions I mentioned. If your roof slope is not facing due south, then the number is smaller. There is even a factor I didn't calculate in. For some winter days, your direct sunlight is less than 12 hours.

Angle Power factor
0____100.00% noon
15____96.59% 11 AM/1 PM
30____86.60% 10 AM/2 PM
45____70.71% 9 AM/3 PM
60____50.00% 8 AM/4 PM
75____25.88% 7 AM/5 PM
90_____0.00% 6 AM/6 PM

[coyotes_geek]

Well, depending on where you are and the angle of the sun, etc.

280 sq ft = 26 sq meters. Conventional solar cells only get about 1 kw per meter at full direct sunlight. If you live say in San Antonio with a roof pitch of 30 degrees and facing due south, then you have nearly full power at noon during the equinox. Summer solstice noon power will be at 99.4% and winter solstice noon at 83.9%. Now with fixed solar cells perpendicular to the noon sun, they will recieve 0% power at 6 AM and 6 PM. The daily average becomes about 29% in the summer and 24.5% in the winter. If calculated at the winter average, 24.5% of 26 watts is only 6.37 watts. Now consider average cloud cover, humidity, etc... That 6.37 watts is under optimum conditions under the conditions I mentioned. If your roof slope is not facing due south, then the number is smaller. There is even a factor I didn't calculate in. For some winter days, your direct sunlight is less than 12 hours.

Angle Power factor
0____100.00% noon
15____96.59% 11 AM/1 PM
30____86.60% 10 AM/2 PM
45____70.71% 9 AM/3 PM
60____50.00% 8 AM/4 PM
75____25.88% 7 AM/5 PM
90_____0.00% 6 AM/6 PM

Interesting stuff. I forget all the particulars on how much power I was going to get out of the system but I know the installer I would have used went through all those calcs and showed them to me. I could also be off on the square footage of the system. I just remember 3 kilowatt system and with rebates and incentives I'd have been out of pocket about $10 grand and depending on the electric rates it would have taken around 10 years to pay itself off.

[Wild Cobra]

However I do remember this http://www.azocleantech.com/Details.asp?NewsID=273

I know the Portland Zoo already has been recycling their animal waste in various ways, I think for power generation as well.

I also came across this short article http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009...or-storage.php which would actually answer my personal storage question.

This is already common at waste treatment facilities. They capture the methane and generate their own power with it.

Now there is a researcher who is engaged in genetically modifying bacteria to make fuel. J.C. Bell claims to have the solution, but I haven't heard of anything yet, or the pilot project to prove his work. Check these out though:

Bell Bio-Energy web site

Researcher: Discovery could end energy crisis

National news media burying amazing oil breakthrough?
Man working to convert all that grows into fuel surprised by 'inattention'

Anything that grows 'can convert into oil'
Company finds natural solution that turns plants into gasoline

Impossible?...Not Always; 5 Billion Barrels a Year Says Bell

[Wild Cobra]

Haha....man, you got bluffed on that one.

---snip---
Here's a real fusion device. Takes up a load of power...but it works.

Small scale, expensive, but it works.

What did you think I meant?

[RandomGuy]

Is it that we just don't know enough about how the photosynthesis process works? Or is it that we cant figure out how to tap into the energy produced?

Somone actually posted a new concept car that does just that. Sucks up CO2 and sunlight to charge batteries.

[MiamiHeat]

again

I do not know why the President does not try to make history

create another Manhattan project, smaller obviously than the original one, but still a large focused project funded by the government

it's goal : to find a new source of infinitely renewable clean power to replace oil, and a new engine to replace the archaic combustion engine. this will create a new industry for the world, in which America will lead in. new jobs, prestige for america, etc.

He can go down in history.

Why don't they ing do it already?

[RandomGuy]

again

I do not know why the President does not try to make history

create another Manhattan project, smaller obviously than the original one, but still a large focused project funded by the government

it's goal : to find a new source of infinitely renewable clean power to replace oil, and a new engine to replace the archaic combustion engine. this will create a new industry for the world, in which America will lead in. new jobs, prestige for america, etc.

He can go down in history.

Why don't they ing do it already?

Good question. Such an endeavor would probably entail (gasp!) new taxes.

There is a non-profit that essentially urges the government to undertake what they call a New Apollo project to do just that.

http://apolloalliance.org/

Our Mission
The Apollo Alliance is a coalition of labor, business, environmental, and community leaders working to catalyze a clean energy revolution that will put millions of Americans to work in a new generation of high-quality, green-collar jobs. Inspired by the Apollo space program, we promote investments in energy efficiency, clean power, mass transit, next-generation vehicles, and emerging technology, as well as in education and training. Working together, we will reduce carbon emissions and oil imports, spur domestic job growth, and position America to thrive in the 21st century economy.

The big problem I see is the knee-jerk anti-environmentalist streak within the modern conservative movement and Republican party.

I find it the height of irony that the same conservative movement that accuses "liberals" of over-emotional reactions to policy problems, has some bizzarre emotional reaction to the modern evironmental movement. This causes them to almost automatically poo-poo policies simply because they seem a bit "green" even when those policy solutions offer some real chance of being more pro-business and pro-economic growth than the alternative.

[DarrinS]

If you think about it, oil is a biofuel.

[DarrinS]

Good question. Such an endeavor would probably entail (gasp!) new taxes.

There is a non-profit that essentially urges the government to undertake what they call a New Apollo project to do just that.

http://apolloalliance.org/



The big problem I see is the knee-jerk anti-environmentalist streak within the modern conservative movement and Republican party.

I find it the height of irony that the same conservative movement that accuses "liberals" of over-emotional reactions to policy problems, has some bizzarre emotional reaction to the modern evironmental movement. This causes them to almost automatically poo-poo policies simply because they seem a bit "green" even when those policy solutions offer some real chance of being more pro-business and pro-economic growth than the alternative.

No need for emotion -- just look at examples of green failure. California immediately comes to mind.

[ElNono]

This is the way of the future...

[DarrinS]

again

I do not know why the President does not try to make history

create another Manhattan project, smaller obviously than the original one, but still a large focused project funded by the government

it's goal : to find a new source of infinitely renewable clean power to replace oil, and a new engine to replace the archaic combustion engine. this will create a new industry for the world, in which America will lead in. new jobs, prestige for america, etc.

He can go down in history.

Why don't they ing do it already?

[ChumpDumper]

No need for emotion -- just look at examples of green failure. California immediately comes to mind.

In what way is it a green failure?

[DarrinS]

In what way is it a green failure?

Well, if the goal was to make people and businesses leave the state, then it was an overwhelming success.

[ChumpDumper]

Well, if the goal was to make people and businesses leave the state, then it was an overwhelming success.

Which green initiative caused that and how?