SD #1 Friday July 18, 2008 - Energy

[KalashnikoV]

This week's topic will be the discussion and debate of the global "Energy Crisis."

Major points of discussion may include, but are certainly not limited to:

--The reality and severity of the aforementioned crisis in regards to the economy, environment, and renewability of related resources

--Which alternative fuel(s) promise the most ideal, attainable future for powering vehicles

--Which sources of power promise the most ideal, attainable future for powering electrical grids

--Whether or not current efforts are effective in curbing our reliance on fossil fuels or alleviating economic stress

Please note that in order to preserve an ideal environment for intelligent discussion and debate, a number of guidelines should be observed:


--It is strongly recommended that all contributers utilize proper spelling and grammar to the best of their ability

--All posts should be kept strictly related to the topic at hand. This also means that should an irrelevant, inflammatory, pointless, or otherwise undesirable post arise, it should be ignored. Addressing such posts will only serve to further derail discussion.

--Ridicule is not an acceptable form of debate. If you think your opponent is stupid, either prove it via intelligent, coherent rebuttal or ignore them altogether. This also applies to grammar nazi tactics - we don't want that strawman nonsense here - if you find an opponent's statements so incoherent that you can't respond to them, then don't ****ing respond to them. This bears repeating: calling out errors in syntax does not disprove the stance of your opponent. Respond to the content of a post, or don't respond at all.

[pakman21]

I think the best course of action is this:

First we wean everyone off oil. We transition over to a special mix of fuel made from bio-diesel (Diesel from animal fat) and plant oils (Not just corn). This will be ideal as most trucks can run on bio-diesel, and so we all can switch to diesel as they introduce more and more plant oil into the diesel bio-fuel until it's about 40% bio-diesel.

Now, this is a temporary solution only. This may last us fifty, maybe sixty years. Now, the biggest problem is finding enough land to harvest all that plant oils. I think the simple answer would be to convince the south american governments to cut down rain forests to make room for farm lands.

Now, once we've switched from gas to bio-fuels, we should find a permanent, easily attainable source of energy. The way I see it is that there are three most likely candidates:

Hydrogen

Water

Solar

Now I think water would be a better choice for fuel than hydrogen, as hydrogen is a gas and if it happens to leak you're ****ed. Think about 8 hindenburgs per second across the nation. The risk of water-powered cars is cancer, that's pretty much it. Not to mention Hydrogen is a bit harder to produce than regular ol' sea water. The seawater is evaporated as it burns, so not only is that not effecting our enviroment when we drive, but it's actually putting clean water into our eco-system. I'm all for it.

[KalashnikoV]

I think the best course of action is this:

First we wean everyone off oil. We transition over to a special mix of fuel made from bio-diesel (Diesel from animal fat) and plant oils (Not just corn). This will be ideal as most trucks can run on bio-diesel, and so we all can switch to diesel as they introduce more and more plant oil into the diesel bio-fuel until it's about 40% bio-diesel.

Now, this is a temporary solution only. This may last us fifty, maybe sixty years. Now, the biggest problem is finding enough land to harvest all that plant oils. I think the simple answer would be to convince the south american governments to cut down rain forests to make room for farm lands.

Now, once we've switched from gas to bio-fuels, we should find a permanent, easily attainable source of energy. The way I see it is that there are three most likely candidates:

Hydrogen

Water

Solar

Now I think water would be a better choice for fuel than hydrogen, as hydrogen is a gas and if it happens to leak you're ****ed. Think about 8 hindenburgs per second across the nation. The risk of water-powered cars is cancer, that's pretty much it. Not to mention Hydrogen is a bit harder to produce than regular ol' sea water. The seawater is evaporated as it burns, so not only is that not effecting our enviroment when we drive, but it's actually putting clean water into our eco-system. I'm all for it.

Not to be a hippy douche here, but that's not such a good idea. Hell, even barring all the normal hippy crap regarding the fact that you'd be destroying the sole habitat of countless species (some endangered) and destroying one of the last great pieces of wilderness in the world, it's a bad idea. The Rain Forest is one of Earth's biggest and most effective carbon sinks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_sink)

The problem with biofuels like ethanol and bio-diesel is the fact that we're still burning fossil fuels just in order to produce them. Combine this with the fact that it's unclear whether or not they actually have cleaner emissions or not and then you've got a serious problem.

Also, that 50-60 years estimate is inflated big time. Last year, the US burned about 25% of our corn supply producing ethanol and only reduced our oil consumption by 1%. The amount of crops that would have to be consumed in order to seriously wean us off of oil is tremendous, and even if it was possible to produce that much, the consequential exacerbation of world hunger would far outweigh the good done.

[pakman21]

Well I think we should think about ourselves in the short term rather than the long term. Sure global warming can **** **** up pretty badly in the next 100 years or so, but we need to fix this oil crisis and fast. If what the doomsday prophets say are true, and we're about to run out of oil there'll be a much larger catastrophe. Wars over gas will start, and many more people will die than global warming could do.

And I think the animal kingdom can take a hit for the human race. One of humanity's greatest achievements in history is to not feel condolence towards anyone outside of their monkeysphere, and I think we should keep up that tradition and start farming.

As far as the food problem, most third world countries eat rice rather than corn. so I don't think using corn for fuel will affect them all that much.

[KalashnikoV]

Well I think we should think about ourselves in the short term rather than the long term. Sure global warming can **** **** up pretty badly in the next 100 years or so, but we need to fix this oil crisis and fast. If what the doomsday prophets say are true, and we're about to run out of oil there'll be a much larger catastrophe. Wars over gas will start, and many more people will die than global warming could do.

And I think the animal kingdom can take a hit for the human race. One of humanity's greatest achievements in history is to not feel condolence towards anyone outside of their monkeysphere, and I think we should keep up that tradition and start farming.

As far as the food problem, most third world countries eat rice rather than corn. so I don't think using corn for fuel will affect them all that much.

Well, given the current *drastic* rice shortage and your multi-crop suggestion, I still think that's a bit problematic.

[pakman21]

Well, given the current *drastic* rice shortage and your multi-crop suggestion, I still think that's a bit problematic.

Yes, the rice shortage. It's not unlikely that some of that land could be converted into rice fields in south america, helping out people in rwanda, darfur, and ethiopia.

[SupaFruit]

Nice topic. I'd post but I have to leave soon. This'll be a good discussion.

[KalashnikoV]

Yes, the rice shortage. It's not unlikely that some of that land could be converted into rice fields in south america, helping out people in rwanda, darfur, and ethiopia.

Actually, it is. Given the amount of land you'd need to contribute to fueling, let alone feeding Americans, it doesn't look so good for the starving.

This is all ignoring, of course, the economic disaster that could arise when food prices skyrocket due to the shortage.

[pakman21]

Actually, it is. Given the amount of land you'd need to contribute to fueling, let alone feeding Americans, it doesn't look so good for the starving.

This is all ignoring, of course, the economic disaster that could arise when food prices skyrocket due to the shortage.

Well considering south american jungles, combined are as big as the united states, if we farmed even half of that we could triple our corn production.

[KalashnikoV]

Well considering south american jungles, combined are as big as the united states, if we farmed even half of that we could triple our corn production.

Which would decrease our oil consumption by ~10%, and that's being generous.

[pakman21]

Which would decrease our oil consumption by ~10%, and that's being generous.

but if we join that with bio diesel (There are millions of heifers that just get burned when they die, they could definitely be used for fuel) we can cut oil consumption significanlty.

[KalashnikoV]

but if we join that with bio diesel (There are millions of heifers that just get burned when they die, they could definitely be used for fuel) we can cut oil consumption significanlty.

But still, at what cost? Food's scarce enough already (especially speaking from a global standpoint. I know that it's unlikely that many of us at the forum are really feeling the effects of this sort of shortage, but we're some lucky, spoiled pigs) that we can't afford to devote that much production to biofuels without simply trading one sort of crisis for a more drastic one.

[loggerbomb]

Bio Diesels are a fraud. I swear they have been pushed to the front of 'alternative' fuel sources just to discredit renewable fuel sources on a whole so that Big Oil can keep their monopoly on the energy sector. Now, this is totally my own hypothesis, but I think it could be true.

One thing I find funny is how history repeats itself. There was an energy crisis back in the 70's and things smoothed over. Not entirely sure why everyone now is saying that the 'sky is falling'. They said that back in the 70's too. Just makes me sad that once the price of oil comes back down, people will forget what happened and we will have another 20 years of big cars and gas guzzlers. I just hope enough people stick to their guns this time around and actually get some lasting results.

[KalashnikoV]

Bio Diesels are a fraud. I swear they have been pushed to the front of 'alternative' fuel sources just to discredit renewable fuel sources on a whole so that Big Oil can keep their monopoly on the energy sector. Now, this is totally my own hypothesis, but I think it could be true.

One thing I find funny is how history repeats itself. There was an energy crisis back in the 70's and things smoothed over. Not entirely sure why everyone now is saying that the 'sky is falling'. They said that back in the 70's too. Just makes me sad that once the price of oil comes back down, people will forget what happened and we will have another 20 years of big cars and gas guzzlers. I just hope enough people stick to their guns this time around and actually get some lasting results.

This raises another front of the discussion that I'm glad we're considering. It's debatable whether or not we truly are in an "Energy Crisis." Even our ever-shrinking oil supply has enough left for us to figure out how to move on and make the transition in a steady, gradual manner.

In my somewhat educated opinion, I really do think we have the technology to avert this crisis, it just needs to be implemented.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm a big fan of nuclear power. Modern technology allows us to operate nuclear plants much more safely, cleanly, and efficiently than mining and drilling for fossil fuels. I think if you combine a widespread nuclear power grid with compact, home-based solar panels and wind turbines, we'd have a perfect solution. At that point, fully electric cars become a viable solution.

The biggest hurdle is the fact that building a bunch of modern nuclear plants costs money - lots and lots of money.

[KalashnikoV]

Discuss, you bastards, discuss.


/Bump

[Kero]

Discuss, you bastards, discuss.


/Bump
I would jump right in, but this be a rather tricky topic to jump into.

Anyway, they've been going on and on about drilling more into that Alaskan refuge where possibly untold amounts of oil sit - amounts that can almost instantly bring oil prices down on the energy mercantiles - with nothing to do. Think about this for a second : It's been close to 3 decades since the U.S. has added a new oil refinery, almost dating back to the last oil crisis. As for pakman's arguments for bio-diesel, cutting down the Amazon produces more negatives than positives - not only would we remove the World's Biggest carbon sink, we would also tear down the homes of countless animals, a few Brazilian tribes (including the ones that were said to have had no outside contact with the world - try googling that up)....not to mention adding to an unwanted business, the logging industry.
Another problem rather unnoticed is the market itself. Wall Street, and almost every other stock exchange in the world, is indirectly responsible for how expensive everything has gotten. Consider this also for a moment - speculation is through the roof, OPEC still controls a vast sector of where most our outside oil comes from, and Congress has still failed to close the Enron loophole (http://www.stopoilspeculators.com/), something I just finished google-ing for the sake of this discussion. Everything ties together - the Wall Street indexes for oil over $100 for the past 2-4 months now. Even if speculators have predicted - correctly, as of recently - drops in oil prices, most of them have still managed to drive prices sky-high for their own selfish needs.

Which is why I might start considering Economics, I know too much of them as of late. That's why I wanted something like the mortgage mess to be our first topic, but oh well.

[KalashnikoV]

I would jump right in, but this be a rather tricky topic to jump into.

Anyway, they've been going on and on about drilling more into that Alaskan refuge where possibly untold amounts of oil sit - amounts that can almost instantly bring oil prices down on the energy mercantiles - with nothing to do. Think about this for a second : It's been close to 3 decades since the U.S. has added a new oil refinery, almost dating back to the last oil crisis. As for pakman's arguments for bio-diesel, cutting down the Amazon produces more negatives than positives - not only would we remove the World's Biggest carbon sink, we would also tear down the homes of countless animals, a few Brazilian tribes (including the ones that were said to have had no outside contact with the world - try googling that up)....not to mention adding to an unwanted business, the logging industry.
Another problem rather unnoticed is the market itself. Wall Street, and almost every other stock exchange in the world, is indirectly responsible for how expensive everything has gotten. Consider this also for a moment - speculation is through the roof, OPEC still controls a vast sector of where most our outside oil comes from, and Congress has still failed to close the Enron loophole (http://www.stopoilspeculators.com/), something I just finished google-ing for the sake of this discussion. Everything ties together - the Wall Street indexes for oil over $100 for the past 2-4 months now. Even if speculators have predicted - correctly, as of recently - drops in oil prices, most of them have still managed to drive prices sky-high for their own selfish needs.

Which is why I might start considering Economics, I know too much of them as of late. That's why I wanted something like the mortgage mess to be our first topic, but oh well.

It'll be a long while before the US begins really tapping into its own oil supplies. We've been jealous of them for decades, just as you've stated. The philosophy is that it's better to benefit from the resources of other countries before expending our own, but at this point I think that sort of thinking is losing its relevance. We need to be able to aid our own economy while we invest ourselves in another means of energy.

This sort of thing is one of the real reasons I think we need to wean off of oil and start investing in the infrastructure of a true alternative. The corruption in the markets and oil industry is enough to reduce the practicality of oil for its price without even the concern of a low supply or environmental damage.

[loggerbomb]

This sort of thing is one of the real reasons I think we need to wean off of oil and start investing in the infrastructure of a true alternative. The corruption in the markets and oil industry is enough to reduce the practicality of oil for its price without even the concern of a low supply or environmental damage.

I think it is this reason here, more than anything else that should have people pissed off. If we had an abundance of energy and/or our own personal stores of power, no one would be able to corrupt the system - or at least the chance would be minimized.

Also, I do not think Nuclear Power is such a bad idea, but the problem is that there still is no truly secure way to store the waste. Right now it gets cased up and buried deep in places like the Canadian Shield, but the problem is that the materials it gets cased in start to break down before the half life of depleted rods is up. Not to mention that an earthquake could rupture those sealed canisters. If it were up to me, I'd fire the crap into the sun or put it on the moon, but than it would really suck if a shuttle blew up and scattered radioactive waste throughout the atmosphere.

[KalashnikoV]

I think it is this reason here, more than anything else that should have people pissed off. If we had an abundance of energy and/or our own personal stores of power, no one would be able to corrupt the system - or at least the chance would be minimized.

Also, I do not think Nuclear Power is such a bad idea, but the problem is that there still is no truly secure way to store the waste. Right now it gets cased up and buried deep in places like the Canadian Shield, but the problem is that the materials it gets cased in start to break down before the half life of depleted rods is up. Not to mention that an earthquake could rupture those sealed canisters. If it were up to me, I'd fire the crap into the sun or put it on the moon, but than it would really suck if a shuttle blew up and scattered radioactive waste throughout the atmosphere.

Actually, the whole "bury deep underground and forget about it" strategy is really quite safe. Should the facility at Yucca Mountain be opened anytime soon (or ever, for that matter. ****ing hippies...) we'd be able to keep the stuff buried deep, deep underground where it's not able to hurt anyone. Should the unimaginable happen and an earthquake destroy the facility along with all the casks and release the waste, well... nothing would happen. There would be a bunch of radioactive waste buried a few miles underneath the middle of nowhere.

[loggerbomb]

Actually, the whole "bury deep underground and forget about it" strategy is really quite safe. Should the facility at Yucca Mountain be opened anytime soon (or ever, for that matter. ****ing hippies...) we'd be able to keep the stuff buried deep, deep underground where it's not able to hurt anyone. Should the unimaginable happen and an earthquake destroy the facility along with all the casks and release the waste, well... nothing would happen. There would be a bunch of radioactive waste buried a few miles underneath the middle of nowhere.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I recall reading information that said that in such a case the material would seep into the water table.

[KalashnikoV]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I recall reading information that said that in such a case the material would seep into the water table.

I haven't heard that, but since I'm uninformed, I'll have to do some research.

[loggerbomb]

I haven't heard that, but since I'm uninformed, I'll have to do some research.

Lol, I did not bother looking it up either as I thought that Nuclear Energy was your thing and you knew more about it! :D

[KalashnikoV]

Lol, I did not bother looking it up either as I thought that Nuclear Energy was your thing and you knew more about it! :D

Apparently not. ;)

Edit: Aha!

"Yucca Mountain has unique characteristics that make it arguably the best location to store hazardous waste, chiefly a water table so low that it is possible to store steel canisters of waste 1000 feet below ground and 1000 feet above the water table..."

"...The Nuclear Regulatory Agency is requiring a much more cautious evaluation that exams what would happen with odds as low as 1 in 10,000 over 10,000 years, which would be equivalent to something that happens only once every 100 million years..."

"...D. J. Andrews and colleagues at USGS looked at the worst-case scenario to find that the ground can move a maximum of 3.6 meters per second, which is near the most intense ground motion ever recorded anywhere, but is within the range of feasible engineering mitigation."

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071204170120.htm

So, apparently, your proposed risk is a very real threat. However, Yucca Mountain is located and engineered to deal with that very threat. I guess that makes us both right, in a way.

[loggerbomb]

w.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071204170120.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071204170120.htm)

So, apparently, your proposed risk is a very real threat. However, Yucca Mountain is located and engineered to deal with that very threat. I guess that makes us both right, in a way.

Hmm, so there is only one place that can store waste? Seems like there could be a problem transporting all that waste from sites around the US to that area. I'd hate to see a train derail filled with toxic brew.

[KalashnikoV]

Hmm, so there is only one place that can store waste? Seems like there could be a problem transporting all that waste from sites around the US to that area. I'd hate to see a train derail filled with toxic brew.

Believe it or not, I've had my response to just such a comment in mind for a while. Skip to about 6:15 in.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YcBoDP2nQTo

Bull**** is such a great show.

[KalashnikoV]

I remember a lot more people than pakman, Kero, Logger, and me expressing interest in this sort of thing. Oh well. I hope this friday's topic doesn't fail as hard. (speaking of which PM me ideas PM me ideas PM me ideas PM me ideas)

[fluffy0812]

I remember a lot more people than pakman, Kero, Logger, and me expressing interest in this sort of thing. Oh well. I hope this friday's topic doesn't fail as hard. (speaking of which PM me ideas PM me ideas PM me ideas PM me ideas)

I have two questions for you KV.

1. I wasn't here for the thread you made about this. Is it world stuff, or HP stuff, or both.

2. Is sorta unrelated. How do you make a sticky?

[loggerbomb]

Indeed, such a great show. I have nothing against nukes, (had a power plant like 50 miles from where I grew up) just always envisioned that if some spent fuel rods were blown up, they would like, vaporize and contaminate the area.

You know what does suck living so close to a reactor? All the friggin ugly transmission lines coming from the plant! Oh and dying real fast if there ever was the rare chance of a full meltdown. :D

[KalashnikoV]

I have two questions for you KV.

1. I wasn't here for the thread you made about this. Is it world stuff, or HP stuff, or both.

2. Is sorta unrelated. How do you make a sticky?

Hallpass is not serious enough discussion to be discussed in serious discussion.

Only mods can make a sticky. Some benevolent being must have found this thread worthy enough to sticky it for the week.

Indeed, such a great show. I have nothing against nukes, (had a power plant like 50 miles from where I grew up) just always envisioned that if some spent fuel rods were blown up, they would like, vaporize and contaminate the area.

You know what does suck living so close to a reactor? All the friggin ugly transmission lines coming from the plant! Oh and dying real fast if there ever was the rare chance of a full meltdown. :D

What's life without a little risk, eh?

[fluffy0812]

Hallpass is not serious enough discussion to be discussed in serious discussion.

Only mods can make a sticky. Some benevolent being must have found this thread worthy enough to sticky it for the week.



What's life without a little risk, eh?

Thanks, this helped me out alot.

[loggerbomb]

Hallpass is not serious enough discussion to be discussed in serious discussion.

Seriously.


Only mods can make a sticky. Some benevolent being must have found this thread worthy enough to sticky it for the week.


You're welcome.


What's life without a little risk, eh?

I always wanted to see if I could outrace a Nuclear blast in my car...

[Dookeymuffin]

Can't we just use the gas hydrates forming on the sea floor, molecules of methane trapped in molecules of water, making flammable water, even though it's untapped, there are about a billion to trillion pounds of it worldwide, more than all our fuels formed together, and is efficient too, since burning of fuels will give us energy. Sooner or later this is what we have to use when we run out. Or we can use the power of song.