Bp back in the news, another spill

[dashboardmonkey]

What the fuck!

[mrsleeve]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

that was insightful

Certainly there are flaws in my thinking and no doubt mrsleeve will offer a good counter argument which is always welcome But much like people made sacrifices for our nations independence, or the sacrifices made to stop Hitler, someone somewhere at some time in the near future will have to sacrifice something to ensure sustainability. If we dont do it willingly... nature will force us to (or destroy us).

Gee what am I around here the local killer of dreams and voice of the status quo???? I am glad my ramblings are at least hitting some bells, and that some one at least reads my poorly spelled and punctuated posts and for that I thank you, at least makes the time I put in some what justified :)

As to the bolded portion. Necessity is the mother of all invention. When it becomes necessary to continue it will happen. You cant force it with govt actions. You see where that is leading us.

I agree that nuclear power is a good idea (even though i tend to be on the environmentalist side...) Nuclear power has become far safer and cleaner than in years past. The trouble I see with nuclear is that it is only a temporary solution. Uranium reserves (known) will only last 100 years tops if a large movement towards nuke power is implemented. Also, nuclear fuels like uranium are even more dangerous than coal to mine. And of course there is the waste issue, which has been resolved I believe better than coal waste (see kingston,TN ash spill) I see nuclear power as a stop gap to allow more time for other alternatives to become more efficient and cheaper. Although there are something like 250 years worth of coal reserves... the continued use of coal as the primary electricity source will have severe environmental consequences.

We have lots of NG and Coal here with the modern scrubber tech that is getting better and better all the time, the air coming out the stack is cleaner than the air Going into the combustion process. That and the Abundance of Both coal and NG it makes no economical sense to go about this any other way.

200 years of U. thats again KNOWN deposits. We will likely find more if need be kinda like we do with oil. That and hot fusion is getting better still just past the break even point for reactions. In 200 years I have a suspicion we will have cold fusion reactors being sold and walmart Like in B2F 2.

My vision (and the reason I'm in college right now)...

Hence the idealism :D

Nuclear power + wind/solar/geo/hep/wave to replace coal/oil/gas as electricity sources. Solar and wind to provide the majority of electricity while nuclear is used to supply a reliable variable base (much like reservoir hydroelectric plants do now). HEP, Geo and wave should be implemented where available and coal or natural gas as backup sources only!

Wind = WAY to expensive to make power. They are only going up all over because of all OUR TAX dollars to subsidize their construction. Oh and its not windy all the time, = not enough power when you need it. They are very very expensive to put up. they cost about 1.7million dollars per Meg of power as compared to about 600-800k bucks per meg of conventional fired power generation.

Wind all the methods you have listed there take UP HUGE AMOUNTS OF REAL ESTATE. You have a conventional power facility that may fence off 640 ac (1 sq mile) to be tied up in power generation and assume its a 800meg facility. thats 640million dollars to build. Now lets be optimistic and say we are going to put up a equal wind farm with 2meg turbines so it takes 400 of them at 3.4mill a pop. Or 1.36 BILLION dollars roughly 2 times more expensive in initial construction and tie up about 204,000 acres (320 sq miles) or 320 times the land assets. Not to mention the massive maintenance bills to keep them running, the lease's and royalties paid to the land owners (about 4000 per turbine per year) NOT GOING TO BE ECONOMICAL WITH OUT THE CONTINUED GOVT SUBSIDIES. Plus those damm things are NOISY AS FUCK no one want them around. Solar Geo, and wave are similar in cost, maintenance, and land usage while less than Wind would still be masive. Thats all land that is less productive in making food.

NO it will not be economical at all the more you put up. Not till Conventional means of production are similar in cost. This is why the govt is DESPERATE to get CAP and Trade through. this way they can artificially inflate the cost of energy at will, to eliminate the low cost option. Because they know the Alternative sources will never be able to compete with out govt intervention just like now.

Transportation...

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for longer range vehicles and electric vehicles / mass transit for urban transit....

Hydrogen produced using water and electricity at the fill site (gas station) using electricity during low demand times. This eliminates the large fuel transportation system we have now. Electricity would be sourced from local alternative sources and produced hydrogen would be stored in cells (not compressed / liquid tanks)

Hydrogen is worse than ethanol for a fuel source. Gas has on average 125,000BTU of stored energy per gallon. LIQUID H2 (the kind you dont want to use) only has 35,280BTU . Or only 28% of the stored energy and thats a best case situation. Now a gallon by volume of H2 in gas form has only about 36BTU ( you would be hard pressed to light a cigar with that, let alone run a vehicle of any kind)

Not to mention that the eletrical power to break water into H2 and O2 is way more than it takes to refine crude. Oh yeah Gas may be volatile, but is way more stable than H2 is in a bad situation. Anything that is a gas at standard atmospheric pressure, is far more dangerous in both accidents and the equipment in the car and refueling. Its vapors will escape that much easier. also there is not a seal (that I am aware of) that will keep H2 in, its so small it leaks past anything and well that can be far more dangerous when you fire up your car thats been sitting in the garage for a month while you were on vacation.

Do I still have to connect the dots for you ?????

High speed electric train transit between large metropolitan areas to reduce / eliminate air travel.

Have you ever riden on a Amtrak for any length of time???? I have, unless you have too DONT.

More Govt spending that would be an investment of 100's of BILLIONS if not Trillions. The airlines dont cost the govt (tax payers) too much as opposed to amtrak. Is there any privately owned Passenger rail systems anywhere in the world???? Its not a viable transport system as it is now, with out govt subsidization anywhere. Its not the job of the govt to get you form point a to b. Virtually nothing we are discussing here is the in the scope of the govt, but yet here we are. Lets not let it continue to destroy the US way of life.

Of course all of these ideas require a change in popular thought on transportation and of course initial investment by someone. All these ideas are expensive now, but like anything produced in large quantities, costs go down and efficiencies go up. While a wind turbine may be expensive now, if you're building millions of them the cost will be reduced.

Umm No it will never get cheaper than conventional methods no matter how many of what ever is built or implemented.

Oil is finite, coal is finite, and eventually a shift will have to be made. Unfortunately, there is a lot of money to be made with oil and coal, and those industries will fight hard and spend lots of money to stifle the growth of alternative sources. Once these fossil fuels lose their profitability (due to scarcity or extraction costs) energy companies will want to be poised to lead the next fuel (which I believe will be hydrogen)

I will not dispute any of that at all. But Fossil fuels will be with us in heavy use till long after we are dead. We have tons of oil gas coal, for well over 100 years of continued exploitation. But this takes us full circle, that Necessity is the mother of all invention

No one likes to change their lifestyle though, and that's what makes this energy problem so difficult. People don't like to change, and the ideas I've presented here would require people to give up some conveniences.

Yup your really correct. No one likes to give up 2/3+ of their paycheck either. To do just 1 of those things you have purposed you will have to pay for it. The only way to do that is to lower the standard of living of everyone in America by taxing the shit out of them to pay for it. Or raise the cost of living to the point where nearly everything is unaffordable. Everything from the food you eat to the astro glide you use on your girlfriend is tied to the cost of energy, the more it costs the more everything costs. The less you have to live your life and enjoy it with.

I trust I have made my case ;)

[BlueBMW]

Hence the idealism :D

^^^^^^^ True that! :p

As far as the viability of solar / wind, I've seen some new technologies in each that look promising. Micro turbines for urban areas and flexible fabric like solar panels that can be put on almost any surface.

As far as the wind taking up too much real estate, it seems like a lot of wind farms are dual use for livestock grazing and wind mills.

You do make very good points, and they lead to the real issue I need to find a solution for. While I'd like everyone to want to save the world and adopt all these things for that reason alone, reality is the economy drives these things. So my challenge is to figure out how to make alternative sources profitable. Its not too far off I dont think. Costs have been coming down and efficiencies going up.

Sounds like we'll both be around to see what happens over the next 50 years or so!

[briansjacobs]

the only reason alternative energy is so expensive in this country in comparison to other countries is because fuel is so cheap in this country. Europeans are paying the equivalant of $9.00 per gallon for fuel. The cost of the fuel is the same, but in the US fuel is only taxed at about 17% but taxed at 70% in europe, That is why they have cars that are so much more fuel effecient than us, and that is they have succesful alternative energy programs in Europe.

[z31maniac]

the only reason alternative energy is so expensive in this country in comparison to other countries is because fuel is so cheap in this country. Europeans are paying the equivalant of $9.00 per gallon for fuel. The cost of the fuel is the same, but in the US fuel is only taxed at about 17% but taxed at 70% in europe, That is why they have cars that are so much more fuel effecient than us, and that is they have succesful alternative energy programs in Europe.

Yes, and the AMerican economy is built on cheap energy/transportation.

Let's get gas up over $4/gal right now and see what happens.

[briansjacobs]

Yes, and the AMerican economy is built on cheap energy/transportation.

Let's get gas up over $4/gal right now and see what happens.

I think it is more likely that politicians pockets are lined with cheap energy/transportation money.

[Ral]

Brian, have you heard about the alternative energy fiasco happening now in Spain? They pushed for a big alternative energy program, all subsidized, and it nearly bankrupted the country; it also did not provide nearly the amount of jobs it was expected to.

[z31maniac]

I think it is more likely that politicians pockets are lined with cheap energy/transportation money.

But increasing the tax on oil/gas 4-fold isn't going to do that?

ACtually cheap energy is part of what allows the US to enjoy such a high standard of living.

Brian, have you heard about the alternative energy fiasco happening now in Spain? They pushed for a big alternative energy program, all subsidized, and it nearly bankrupted the country; it also did not provide nearly the amount of jobs it was expected to.

Now don't go bringing facts and logic into these arguments. Those things have no place in the liberal mind.

[briansjacobs]

Brian, have you heard about the alternative energy fiasco happening now in Spain? They pushed for a big alternative energy program, all subsidized, and it nearly bankrupted the country; it also did not provide nearly the amount of jobs it was expected to.

agreed, I feel the free market is the only way things truly work. For something to be succesful there needs to be both supply and demand. They were forcing a supply with no natural demand.

Wind farms can be a private investment, people that are on the grid now and generate their own energy via solar or wind can sell that energy back to the grid. The demand can be how to get off the grid cheaper, there are many ways to skin the cat, If I had the answers I would be doing it and not here pretending we have the answers. Bio-diesel is an excellent example, people are taking a resouce that would be recycled and are instead reusing it. Is that alone going to change the world, no but I am glad to see people thinking and trying, even if it does not work it.

[Matt-B]

Aunt and Uncle live there, there pissed. They do a lot of scientific work in the area. Pretty messy deal...

[mrsleeve]

the only reason alternative energy is so expensive in this country in comparison to other countries is because fuel is so cheap in this country. Europeans are paying the equivalant of $9.00 per gallon for fuel. The cost of the fuel is the same, but in the US fuel is only taxed at about 17% but taxed at 70% in europe, That is why they have cars that are so much more fuel effecient than us, and that is they have succesful alternative energy programs in Europe.

NOW Your getting it. Fuel in this country is taxed to fucking hell as it is.

The oil drilled or imported has a severance tax per barrel on it (that has been quadrupled in the last week or so). The have to pay a federal land lease for all wells, plus if its on private land they have to pay a lease to the land owner and royalties, that the land owner then pays income taxes on.

The when its shipped through a pipeline the its taxed , then when the refined products go through a pipe line that is taxed.

gets to the depo and leave on a truck, when it goes into the stations tanks, the stations pay 2 cents a gallon to feds, what ever the stat wants, lplus sales tax on top of those.

The why you buy it you pay 18 1/2 cents to the feds, 24 cents for diesel, State and local taxes. The you pay sales tax on top of all that. Fuel at point of consumption is taxed coming and going.

The big oil gets to pay 43% of its annual profits to the feds as well, as all the property taxes it has to pay on all the facilities and pipelines etc etc.

You dont think fuel is taxed enough YET. Do you really want to be handing the govt even more money to waste????? You really want to kill the economy, people will stop buying and doing anything due to cost of energy. You tell me
'
If you make conventional fuels artificially as expensive as the GREEN shit to make the green semi viable you still run into the issues of lack of efficiency compared to the conventional sources, which I keep laying out.

The US is much more spread out and has a much larger rural population that needs to travel to get to work, to get food, supplies etc... We make fuels that will make everything very very expensive due to higher shipping and production costs. This will raise the cost of living substantially, and bring down the quality of living of virtually everyone in this country. Is that something you are will to pass on to our children, a lower standard of living?????

Also I have explained to you several times now WHY those little Euro cars are not sold in the USA, thanks to the EPA and the lack of heavy safety features, mandated by the FEDERAL D.O.T. Not to mention many people dont want them, they are not suited to out life style, unless you live in a urban environment. Many of us dont live in such places , nor ever want.




Note to bio diesel. it gets really thick when it gets cold and it will make your life hell as many of the anti gel additives DONT WORK good on bio fuels. Thats not good when you live and work where it gets below freezing or worse below zero. Also Less BTU in bean oil vs petrol but its much closer than ethanol vs gas.

[briansjacobs]

you are correct about the amount fuel is taxed here in the states, it comes out to about 17%, in europe it is taxed at 70%. No I am not saying I want it taxed higher I am saying the reason there is more of a demand for it in europe is because how expensive fuel is over there. I have no problem with the US goverment taxing people the income they make on leasing their land to oil companies I also have no problem with the amount oil companies are taxed on their profits, I have many friends in that same 48% tax bracket, some of them bitch some of them are happy to pay it.

Sleeve you seem to misunderstand me, I am not debating for either side, I am offering opposing viewpoints and often flip flop on sides.

I personally will be fine either way, do I want to pay more no, do I want the free market to come up with a solution, yes. To be completly frank I think people that argue against progress just sound like idiots, I understand your point that you dont want it mandated, that is not what I am talking about.

[mrsleeve]

you are correct about the amount fuel is taxed here in the states, it comes out to about 17%, in europe it is taxed at 70%. No I am not saying I want it taxed higher I am saying the reason there is more of a demand for it in europe is because how expensive fuel is over there. I .

Ummmm I assume you meant that 17% of the end consumer price is taxes and 70% of the end consumer price in Europe is taxes. Also for that matter your figure is just the added tax at the pump on top of what the oil companies, have charged for the product. Its just the Fed, state and local and sales taxes on that fuel that they are getting that 17% number from. Not all the taxes the are built into the product price before the shit gets the hose thats going into your car.

Because I know for a fact that fuel is taxed well beyond 100% in Most places in europe, in many places the taxes are close to 150% of the cost of the actual fuel.

Yes Your 100% right, I am 100% against the govt trying to artificially steer the markets by using punitive taxation and regulation to make a inferior product (for many reasons) competitive, with the MUCH cheaper attentive. WE need FAR LESS govt in our lives, Not more of it.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. -Thomas Jefferson

What you purpose with the taxation to make Green energy viable is just to opposite of this .


If you truly believe the free market is the way things work, most of the stance's you have taken on these topics are totally counter intuitive to this position. If you are just offering up alternative view points that is one thing and thats fine, but you see, to consistently take them up. That makes me think that you are just stirring the pot.