FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


energy





edallica
hey folks.

so we're going to run out of fossil fuels pretty soon eh? but no one seems to care. to me the obvious solution is nuclear power, but there appears to be a large bunch of people against this form of energy.

fair enough, there are huge amounts of toxic waste when the reactor is finished but i would say that in that period of time its more likely to come up with a solution to the toxic waste than it would be to come up with a completey new form of power.

i guess within the next 10-20 years there will definately be a huge increase in the number of nuclear reactors but what will be the side effects of this? i think that eventually that the way we live just now will slowly drift away and we will have to slip into some sort of pre-computer age era, simply because there wont be enough energy.

discuss.
S3nd K3ys
edallica wrote:
hey folks.

so we're going to run out of fossil fuels pretty soon ...


That's your opinion. Wink
Helios
Could be that you're right.. but, could be not Wink

I think that we'll come up with a solution Confused
Just being optimistic Smile
kevbailey
I did a report on this, and my science teacher gave me perfect, so here it is...

Energy Saving Tips
- Unplug that second fridge. You could save $80 a year on power alone.
- Turn off the outdoor light if you are not expecting anyone.
- If you need lights, Canadian Tire has solar powered lights for $10 each or you can spend as much as $20 each for fancy solar lights.
- Turn off lights when you are not in the room.
- Turn back the furnace or air conditioning by 3-4C
- Unplug your computer, television, VCR, DVD, and stereo if you are going away for a week or more. Even when they are off, they use power to run internal clocks and memory settings. These account for 40% of their energy consumption.
- If every household in Canada replaced 4 (average 100 watt) incandescent light bulbs with 4 (equivalent 27 watt) compact fluorescent light bulbs, burning on average 5 hours per day, we would save 22 GWh per day or enough energy saved to shut down 17 power plants. That would also reduce the greenhouse emissions in Canada by 397000 tonnes. That is equivalent to taking 66000 cars off of the road for a year. You would also save approximately $6 per light bulb changed per year.
- If the government bought these lamps for every household at $3 each, total cost would be $180 million. We cannot build the same 17 power plants for $180 million.
- If every household in Canada installed a solar hot water heater that saved 5.8 KWh/day, we would cumulatively save 87 GWh/day (one thousand kilowatts or (at 8.95/KWh) $778 650 nation wide per day. $284 207 250 per year.) enough energy saved to shut down another 67 power plants.
- If every household in Canada replaced 1 average-flow shower head with an energy-saving shower head, we would save 1.3 kwh per day per household or 19.2 gWh per day enough energy saved to shut down another 15 power plants.
- If the government bought these low-flow shower heads for every household at $1 each, total cost would be $15 million.

Cost to build a generator...
The Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts was sold for $80 million, though $67 million of that was for fuel. To be absolutely fair, the plant was sold for $13 million, then. With all of the savings in the above articles, it would cost $1287 million to buy those power plants. It would cost the government $195 million plus we would have to pick up the tab on the solar hot water heater, which costs about $2600.

How about our cities?
I live in Toronto, and the biggest thing that I see that Toronto can change would be to turn down the brightness of the street lights. You can read a book outside in Toronto at night. Believe me, I tested this theory. People actually have to close their blinds to make darkness over the street lights in frount of their houses.

References -
<http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et0301/et0301s21.html>
Macleans - January 24, 2005
<http://www.worldwatch.org/press/news/1999/03/04/>

This will be seen on "http://www.kevinbailey.com/" when I get the layout complete for the website.


[EDIT]
Ha! I forgot my opinion. I say that some rich person pays scientists to figure out the most efficient way to get solar power. It would have to be enough to make the person think that it is worth it to them to investigate it.
thiamshui
The oni way is cut down on our usage.. Humans are juz like cancerous cells in the body (Mother Earth).. They are only keen about developing n growing.. Growing bigger n bigger.. And eventually, cause the collapse of the body, Mother Earth.
S3nd K3ys
thiamshui wrote:
The oni way is cut down on our usage.. Humans are juz like cancerous cells in the body (Mother Earth).. They are only keen about developing n growing.. Growing bigger n bigger.. And eventually, cause the collapse of the body, Mother Earth.


There's only one way to fix it, we all have to kill ourselves and remove the humans from the earth. Shocked
ajoaktree
One of our main problems is that we (human race) won't accept anything that takes us backward technologically. I know I'd suffer very bad withdrawls without my computers w/ games & my CD's & MP3 players. I could do without TV, but my wife would go insane. When I was younger (8-11 yrs old) I wanted to live in the mountains and live off the land, then I got a Commodore VIC20 computer and have been a junkie ever since. I think we have become to soft, if we had to live off the land, no fossil fuels or electricity, we would crumble as a society.

My Humble Opinion.
Mark999111
we will run outve fuels eventually, so nuclear seems to be the best way. There is solar power and that, but its time everybody faced the simple fact that it sucks.

And if the hippys are worried that terrorists will attack the nuclear plants, then tony blair has to stop being such a politically correct pansy and actually do something about it and kick them out, hurray! better yet, shoot the bastards so they cant plot against us from afganistan or whereever
coolclay
I agree with ajoaktree, the majority of humans have become wholly dependent on technology in their everyday lives. But if we continue to live unsustainably then eventually our lifestyles will be forced to change. This change won't be a nice or pretty change either.

We all saw what happened when New Orleans got hit by the hurricane, and their society broke down. Normal people like you and I started stealing, looting, robbing, and killing. I believe what happened in New Orleans will happen eventually around the world, and only those with the knowledge of how to survive without modern conveniences will survive. When this will happen I don't know, but the Earths oil supply is slowly dwindling and are expected to only last at our current rate until around 2050-2060. Maybe this will be when our society breaks down, or maybe there will be a global terroristic act that will destroy our current society. No one can know for sure but, its bound to happen sooner or later. All great society break down someday, examples include Rome, the Aztecs, and many others I can't think of at the moment.

My advice to those who care, is to educate yourselves, in the outdoors, and how to live without man made conviences. Then and only then will you have any chance of survival.
Shade of Blue
I know in Germany they have widespread solar energy use; that could help us in the US if the government ever grew enough balls to break away from oil companies.
ajoaktree
I was stationed in North Dakota from 1990 to 1995. It is a very windy place. I wondered and wondered why in the heck they didn't have more "windmills." I came back to N.D. in 2000 and have been there since. I think while I was away overseas the people here figured it out. I'm seeing more and more all the time. *shrugs* Who knows, it may help.
startsomething
I think that we should use more trees. They are renewable. We should have tree farms, so we don't harm the animal's habitats. And we should use water, wind, and solar power. My idea is to have a plant where water cycles through with perpetual motion, turning turbines, powered by solar panels that cover the facility. It would also be surrounded by giant wind mills. Any combustion energy will be done with wood. Like steam. No, scratch that, electricity is better than steam. Electric cars. Everything is electric. And the electricity comes from kinetic energy, not chemical. It would be perfect. Shocked
dydx
WE energies created a program to shift a large percentage of their energy sources to solar energy. It's a start (which probably won't do much overall).
gh0stface
startsomething wrote:
I think that we should use more trees. They are renewable. We should have tree farms, so we don't harm the animal's habitats. And we should use water, wind, and solar power. My idea is to have a plant where water cycles through with perpetual motion, turning turbines, powered by solar panels that cover the facility. It would also be surrounded by giant wind mills. Any combustion energy will be done with wood. Like steam. No, scratch that, electricity is better than steam. Electric cars. Everything is electric. And the electricity comes from kinetic energy, not chemical. It would be perfect. Shocked

You do realize that trees take a long time to grow right? A giant tree that you find in parks takes more then 20 years to get that big. Heck, I wouldn't be suprised if they were nearly 75+ years old.

The only problem with wind power is that wind is consistent enough. I'm not sure about solar or water power though.
btocakci
I think the best soource of energy must be t
hydrogen from now on. Because hydrogen is everywhere, in the water you drink.Just think, the cars working by water!!Exactly wonderful.And the only thing that is formed after using is water again..Anyting better?No, i think..
gonzo
edallica wrote:
within the next 10-20 years there will definately be a huge increase in the number of nuclear reactors


Why are you going to kill off all the tree huggers and violent elfs [sic]?

Or are you referring to the liberalist population die off intrinsic to monogender unions? Or the gene pool evaporation from egocentric impairment of procreation?


What's wrong with hydrogen power?
Mark999111
startsomething wrote:
I think that we should use more trees. They are renewable. We should have tree farms,


Burn the trees to produce heat you mean? That'd cause massive amounts of CO2 to be released into the air, thus promoting global warming
Helios
What about Anti-Material power plants?
edallica
gonzo wrote:
edallica wrote:
within the next 10-20 years there will definately be a huge increase in the number of nuclear reactors


Why are you going to kill off all the tree huggers and violent elfs [sic]?

Or are you referring to the liberalist population die off intrinsic to monogender unions? Or the gene pool evaporation from egocentric impairment of procreation?


What's wrong with hydrogen power?


ive no idea what "Or are you referring to the liberalist population die off intrinsic to monogender unions? Or the gene pool evaporation from egocentric impairment of procreation?
" means...is that even a sentance?

anyway...hydrogen power is about as researched as getting fuel from a banana. (in comparrison to nuclear)

cold fusion is always a long term possibility, but long term means long term.
Delirium
Steam, solar power, wind power, hydro-energy those would be excellent form of energy to replace fossil fuels. There are already prototype cars that are working just fine with solar power and water, but we don't see them on the roads. Maybe it's the big petrol companies that refuse to let them hit the market yet? They would loose a lot of money eh? The problem is that most people want comfort and to save money at the same time, if you offer them another form of energy but that cost more then what they already are using, not a lot would change their habits. Make new form of energy cheaper and you'll see a LOT of customers switching side Surprised
frozenhead
edallica wrote:

so we're going to run out of fossil fuels pretty soon eh?

Maybe YES, maybe NOT. Nuclear Power is just one alternative and just like the other pals said, we can even enumerate several alternatives, not just nuclear power and in other way, it a really a good source because of its great power but it have it's side effects to the environment though. Maybe it would take a clever mind to develop how to dispose it safely.

gonzo wrote:

What's wrong with hydrogen power?

There's nothing wrong to it. In fact, I saw a car powered by just "plain water" as it's fuel source here in our country but then again, the government ignore this breakthrough by this inventor.(Maybe, the government is just worried in the national budget coz it would take a lot in terms of research and development I guess?, I dunno really).Mad
gonzo
kevbailey wrote:
Unplug that second fridge


wow.. save energy by allowing food to spoil. (one resource at the expense of another)

Quote:
spend as much as $20 each for fancy solar lights.


save money on eletricity by wasting money on a battery that will wear out only to be replaced (one resource at the expense of another)


Quote:
Turn back the furnace or air conditioning by 3-4C


no thanks. I like being comfortable



Quote:
replaced .. incandescent light bulbs with 4..fluorescent light bulbs



uhh NO! I hate those lights. Think how much electricity you could save by using candles!



Quote:
- If every household in Canada installed a solar hot water heater


wow has canada solved that whole poverty thing?



Quote:
replaced 1 average-flow shower head with an energy-saving shower head


People would avoid using that shower in favor of the one with actual water pressure.



Quote:
of the street lights.


here I agree with you to a degree. There's no reason to run street lights when there are only a handful of cars driving.




Quote:

I say that some rich person pays scientists


Will this be a fascist edict? Or what's the business incentive to do so?

Quote:
to figure out the most efficient way to get solar power.


Build several collection arrays in the soon-to-be glass fields of iran.



Electricity CANNOT be conserved. It is created on projected demand. "Save the environment.. use less" Riiight. No thanks.
planet
Soon is a fairly accurate timing (in astral terms) so yes you are right =)

Across the board quite a lot is being done in Europe to utilise alternative sources. Just drive across and you will have windmills breathing down your neck =) the smaller the country the easier it is. But the gas price will kill you doing it, hence lots of Diesel powered cars with cats..

In other parts of the world (where the economy doesn't allow it) , like the US of A, its another story all together unfortunately. It is another Gold Rush which albeit being slower, will come to an end but not untill the end is neigh will she move her ass.

In the developing world there is a rush to litterally save lives but movements are being made (too slowly) to help them.
China as an example of an newly awoken Tiger thats running straight into the polution trap, which she will deal with in her usual effective manner but the area is so wast and the population so multitude that it is an gargantous task.

India another example where the sheere size and the needs collide.

Are we in trouble ? yes

Will we as the population of an "anthill" solve them in time, without getting hurt ? no

Will our selfdestructive behavioural and greedy habits and patterns change sufficiently to create a safe environment ? no

We are going ass 'n elbow down the mountain,, fast !!

btw. on the Planets we do have solar energy, windmill and power saving features,,,, but we are very lucky and know it.
Frag
The whole energy thing is a money issue tbh everything to do with it is, if its too expensive it wont happen even if its better for the enviroment. The reason Nuclear is not used as much as it probaly should be is because it is not a good financial option for any government. It costs loads to build one an it takes 10 years fot it to actually start producing energy.

But as we must get off fossil fuels an on to other forms, what forms can we use to make sure there is enough power for everyone. Solar,wind etc barely create anything atm in any country an if we take the fossil fuels away there is no way of us being able to fill that gap with Solar and wind. So the only alternative atm is Nuclear we have to plan ahead an start building them now so that we can get off of Fossil fuels. Yes Nuclear waste is a problem but at the moment it is being dealt with safely, the bigger problem with nuclear is terrorists.
S3nd K3ys
ajoaktree wrote:
I was stationed in North Dakota from 1990 to 1995. It is a very windy place. I wondered and wondered why in the heck they didn't have more "windmills." I came back to N.D. in 2000 and have been there since. I think while I was away overseas the people here figured it out. I'm seeing more and more all the time. *shrugs* Who knows, it may help.


They're trying to ban that stuff here. Kills birds.

Damn hippies. Wink
OnlyOneLife
I say go solar... or wind... both not popultion, yet expensive. Money does seem to be a major factor when people are choosing. I guess I'll have to become rich so I can install solar panels on my roof. Very Happy
S3nd K3ys
OnlyOneLife wrote:
I say go solar... or wind... both not popultion, yet expensive. Money does seem to be a major factor when people are choosing. I guess I'll have to become rich so I can install solar panels on my roof. Very Happy


I have them on my house. Wink It's a solar photovoltaic system that feeds power back into the grid that I don't use. I get credited for it. Also have a solar hot water heater that assists the electric water heater, as well as double pane glass throughout the house, awsome insulation with a thermostatically controlled attic fan, a well for irrigation, and a fire place and pellet stove.

Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

The last vehicle I bought was a diesel truck so I can start doing a conversion to either biodeisel or some other alternative.
SunburnedCactus
Why, that's a very green attitude S3nd K3ys...
S3nd K3ys
SunburnedCactus wrote:
Why, that's a very green attitude S3nd K3ys...


I know it looks that way on the outside, but I'm often offended by greenies and hippies, (more-so than libs, if you can believe that... Shocked ).

The depth of their perception is very hypocritically limited and widely un-founded in several aspects.

The systems in place at my house were done more with monetary savings in mind than environmental savings, but I get the 'feel-good' aspect from it too. Wink
summer-sensation
S3nd K3ys wrote:
thiamshui wrote:
The oni way is cut down on our usage.. Humans are juz like cancerous cells in the body (Mother Earth).. They are only keen about developing n growing.. Growing bigger n bigger.. And eventually, cause the collapse of the body, Mother Earth.


There's only one way to fix it, we all have to kill ourselves and remove the humans from the earth. Shocked


So there's gonna be this one man who's mission is to kill every human on earth, but leave the animals alone? And in the end he does...what? Suicide? And the only things left on earth are animals?

Shocked Gee, I hope not. That would be pretty scary. Besides, wouldn't it be easier to just blow up Earth? We have the nuclear power to do it.

But I don't think I wanna die. At least not yet, anyway.
LeviticusMky
Solar Power - A great option, but it is actualy very akin to nuclear power. A photovoltaic cell requres large amounts of highly radioactive and chemically violent material to be created and they only last a few decades, so the technology needs to improve before solar becomes a "renewable" energy source.

Nuclear - The best option available to us at the moment. Until fusion power comes around (cold fusion is a myth, hot fusion is the only viable energy source) Nuclear power plants are the best option available. There's plenty of uranium in the US to meet our energy demands, which means no more foreign oil, and the actual power generation process is extremely low-impact. The waste generated is a problem, but one that can be dealt with.

Wind - Truly renewable and easy to build power source. The problem is that it can't generate the amounts of power that we as a society demand. Also, there are relatively few places around the world where wind power is a viable energy source, as most places only get intermittent wind, not a constant flow.

Tidal - Tidal energy could revolutionize the coastal areas of the world, but nobody wants to invest money in this technology, they'd rather save the high-priced coastal land for real estate.

Biomass - wood, leaves, waste food, etc. This stuff burns, and while not as hot as coal, it is still a very viable source of energy for small rural populations. The technology to create very low-cost decentralized biomass energy plants is peanuts, making it ideal for farming communitites and the like who have large amounts of bio-waste that can be used in a generator like this.

Trees were mentioned as a renewable source of energy, that's exactly true, to the individual that says they take a long time to grow; do you know how long it takes for oil to be made? The idea would be to have a tree rotation, so that you don't harvest all the trees at the same time, just a portion, rotating the harvest each year to allow trees to mature over their 50-100 year life span. Trees ARE a renewable resource, and shouldn't be overlooked, as long as we stay far away from the wilderness and forests that we have already in place.

I've researched alternative energy a lot, and until we can present the world with fusion energy, nuclear and biomass are our best options.
kevbailey
I was just checking links to my website when I stumbled over this topic that I posted in, and I have one thing to say to gonzo, it's too f***ing bad that you don't respect the people around you enough to realize that this is actually a problem.
a) If you need two fridges, then I would question how much food you eat, because I doubt that anyone would like to marry a SOB like you, let alone have a child with you.
b) Nice to see that you cannot read either. I suggested bulbs at half that price. I would also ask you how much money you spent on solving poverty lately...
c) Also nice to see that you couldn't survive with a house at 18C. Oh wait, you could do that because you are too busy throwing your money at homeless people on the street.
d) Suck it up. They are far more efficient.
e) Oh, I see... you need a shower with high water pressure so that you can scrape the dead skin off your body without actually moving.
f) One thing that we can agree on... wonderful...
g) I agree. Electricity cannot be conserved, but if you lower the demand, then the amount that is made will go down. You said it yourself,
Quote:
created on projected demand

It is people like you who kill the environment bit by bit.

Another points:
Get the SUV's and Hummers off the road. There is no need to be driving a tank around on city streets. They are also hogs with gas.
Related topics
How many energy drinks have you had at once?
EnergY - Why do some people have so much energy?
Climate March
Mass to energy conversion
Change energy use now
What kind of science are you into?
New ways to obtain enery?(PART I)
nuclear energy ?
Solar Power Energy
Aeolic Energy
BioFuel, BioDiesel, Ethanol and renewable energy
Energy for a Human Brain
Favorite Energy Drink
Perpetural Energy
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.