YOU: Fix the US Energy Crisis

[OmCheeto]

i.e. 336 thousand HP? Under the hood of the Space Shuttle more like it. Sounds like a crackpot link.

Oh stop exaggerating.

Small blocks of thorium generate heat surges that are configured as a thorium-based laser, Stevens tells Ward’s. These create steam from water within mini-turbines, generating electricity to drive a car.

It's probably only 25% efficient, so it won't generate any more than 84,000 hp.

Though I was just thinking about such a thing today; "My investment is almost risk free. Unless of course, someone actually does invent a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Fusion#Mr._Fusion" device"

 

[Topher925]

Despite Secretary Chu and President Obama looking to drastically cut and slow down the development of fuel cell and hydrogen technology, fuel cell vehicles seem to be growing and progressing faster than ever. Mercedes-Benz recently bumped up their FCV release date to 2014 from 2015 stating,

We have proven that by sending three vehicles with a fuel cell around the globe without any relevant problems. The issue is infrastructure. We made this trip to prove technology is ready and we need partners to take care of infrastructure.

http://www.insideline.com/mercedes-benz/mercedes-benz-fuel-cell-car-ready-for-market-in-2014.html

Toyota is still planning on mass producing their FC Highlander in 2015 and GM and Honda have stated that they will follow and be releasing vehicles in the same time frame.

It appears that the fuzzy future of alt fuels for transportation applications is becoming more clear. The only problem now is developing the infrastructure. While the US is doing diddly-squat to create a hydrogen fuel infrastructure Europe and Japan are well on their way to support hydrogen technologies.

The European Union and the world’s largest automakers have stated that they will be ready with hydrogen cars and H2 fueling stations by the year 2015. Meanwhile the Federal Government of the United States has stated they have no intention on being ready and are most willing to be followers instead of leaders in these emerging technologies.

http://www.icinola.com/hydrogen-cars/denmark-and-germany-open-new-hydrogen-fueling-stations/

I think the answer to the question "What will replace the ICE powered car?" is quickly becoming Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Vehicles (FCHEV's) with a mix of a BEV's owning a small portion of the market. Now if we could just get our act together maybe we can make this transition quick and painless.

 

[mheslep]

On Mercedes FCV round the http://www.insideline.com/mercedes-benz/b-class/mercedes-benz-b-class-f-cell-set-for-trip-around-the-world.html":

"On remote routes a tank vehicle will be on hand to supply the fuel cell vehicles with the necessary hydrogen," said [Mercedes Benz]

That doesn't sound like a build out of the H2 infrastructure is well on its way.

 

[Topher925]

That doesn't sound like a build out of the H2 infrastructure is well on its way.

That's a rather naive statement. Its obvious that there are remote locations in the world that won't have H2 fueling stations just as there are routes that don't have gas or diesel stations.

 

[mheslep]

...just as there are routes that don't have gas or diesel stations.

In the US? What routes would these be?

 

[Brian H]

Wires are cheaper than hydrogen pipelines.

 

[moejoe15]

Seems to me there is a good solution if you believe in our ingenuity. I personally believe we can solve almost any engineering problem if we put enough will, brains and money into it. We had a smart president once who believed that and we went to the moon. There were probably many nabobs of negativism then who were against it or didn't believe it was possible. I am sure many of those same types will pan this idea too. I will say right now they are wrong.

Every single person on this planet is standing on top of an unlimited clean source of power. Geothermal energy if exploited would solve almost all our energy needs essentially forever. All we need is another Kennedy to focus the national will and resources and all the obstacles could be solved. I KNOW that is true.

 

[mheslep]

...

Every single person on this planet is standing on top of an unlimited clean source of power. Geothermal energy if exploited would solve almost all our energy needs essentially forever.

Do you know how you know this is true, and can explain how, or is that statement a matter of faith?

All we need is another Kennedy to focus the national will and resources and all the obstacles could be solved. I KNOW that is true.

The Moon landing was a spectacular achievement, yet it still amounted to sending only three men there a few times over. Constructing a mechanism that can provide something like energy cheaply to billions of people is an entirely different venture.

 

[SystemsEngr]

For start, force people to switch from incadescent lightbulbs to fluorescent ones. In USA fluorescent bulbs are still BIG news.Small steps like this can make big difference.

Actually, LED bulbs are starting to be available that are lower power input, longer-lasting and not subject to breakage and mercury leakage. These need to be better - right now LEDs available are too expensive, too heavy for some applications, and not bright enough (I looked recently for a 100W replacement, and didn't find one).

 

[moejoe15]

Do you know how you know this is true, and can explain how, or is that statement a matter of faith?...

I was under the impression that there is molten core at the center of the earth? Not true? You don't have to dig far in some places to tap heat and heat is energy. Geothermal is already used in places where the heat is close to the surface and easily tapped. It's there everywhere if you dig deep enough and think it is just an engineering problem and if there is anything we do well it is overcome engineering problems. There are places in the US where it isn't far under the surface. Yellowstone for one. We routinely drill over a mile down now, I think we can get much farther down if we tried. The point is the energy is there, all we have to do is figure out how to get it instead of throwing up our hands and saying it's impossible as people like you want to do.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I was under the impression that there is molten core at the center of the earth? Not true? You don't have to dig far in some places to tap heat and heat is energy. Geothermal is already used in places where the heat is close to the surface and easily tapped. It's there everywhere if you dig deep enough and think it is just an engineering problem and if there is anything we do well it is overcome engineering problems. There are places in the US where it isn't far under the surface. Yellowstone for one. We routinely drill over a mile down now, I think we can get much farther down if we tried. The point is the energy is there, all we have to do is figure out how to get it instead of throwing up our hands and saying it's impossible as people like you want to do.

Nobody was suggesting it was impossible but there are huge technical challenges with widespread geothermal power. Suggesting it as an option without providing good explanation as to why and how is as sensible and productive as saying "if we had lots of solar power we could cheaply power the Earth". It's superficially true but working out the science and engineering of how to make it work is a different story entirely.

 

[mheslep]

... The point is the energy is there, all we have to do is figure out how to get it instead of throwing up our hands and saying it's impossible as people like you want to do.

Yes and the energy of the Sun is there, all we have to do is figure out how to send spaceships to the sun and get it. Look, this is an engineering forum. It seems to me you have two options: actually engage in investigating the possibilities of energy sources such as geothermal, if that is your interest, or preach dogma (to an appropriate audience somewhere else).

 

[moejoe15]

I see, so I should either go out and drill or shut up. Thanks for clearing up the purpose of this thread.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I see, so I should either go out and drill or shut up. Thanks for clearing up the purpose of this thread.

It's not just the purpose of this thread it is the purpose of this entire forum to provide thorough and well reasoned explanations in as much detail as possible using sources from peer-reviewed literature. Initial ideas are fine but when questioned you should be prepared to back up a claim with detailed data and if you read the first post in this thread you will see that the specific purpose here is not to throw around initial ideas but to present fully thought out proposals.

So please don't think there is anything wrong with posting initial ideas such as "I think we should use more geothermal energy" but when somebody asks you to elaborate you should provide proper and thorough explanations and proposals rather than becoming defensive and dismissive.

 

[Redbelly98]

I see, so I should either go out and drill or shut up. Thanks for clearing up the purpose of this thread.

You could provide an estimate of how much power geothermal energy can provide. How many kW per square meter? How many square meters are required to power the United States (or the world, or other country of your choice)? Without doing that, you don't really know if geothermal is viable or not.

If we had those estimates, we could have a discussion about the merits of geothermal power.

[EDIT added:]
And if you can't provide the estimates yourself, you may simply ask "What about geothermal power? How many kW per square meter could it provide? etc. etc."

 

[edpell]

wikipedia gives us

"Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior. Away from tectonic plate boundaries, it is 25–30°C per km of depth in most of the world."

Seems like a great source for a community heat pump for heating in winter.

 

[OmCheeto]

wikipedia gives us

"Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior. Away from tectonic plate boundaries, it is 25–30°C per km of depth in most of the world."

Seems like a great source for a community heat pump for heating in winter.

We talked a bit about this on https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2632239&highlight=kilauea#post2632239".

Ha ha! I was just joking about the gold, and here I found someone who thinks there is a pot full down there!

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/sep/innerfortknox"
Wood has calculated that 1.6 quadrillion tons of gold must lie in Earth's core.

Let's see, at the current spot price, that's $53,968,760,000,000,000,000,000, which works out to about $7.7 trillion per earthling.

Finally, I'll be able to afford an electric car, without having to make the damn thing myself.

But anyways, geothermal is a good idea. I'm curious why no one has tapped the energy from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent" yet. No drilling required. And if you have a blow out, the worst thing you get, is a bunch of seawater.

 

[OmCheeto]

Of course, I'm a huge fan of solar, and think I may have a convert:

I constructed a solar powered volleyball court watering system a couple of years back, out of 3 panels, 3 bilge pumps, and a slew of garden hoses, to get the water from the river, to the furthest court, about 100 yards away.

My friend Cal, who had a gas powered version, (which I have never seen), constructed the above system over the last year. I was quite impressed when I saw it yesterday.

I don't really know what this has to do the the US Energy Crisis, but I thought that maybe if people understood their options, it might be a good start.

Sometimes, it's not about brute force. Sometimes, it's about going with the flow.

(my Sunday Zen moment of the day.^.^.
Ommmm...
Thank you Astro!)

ps. Some of those eco-terrorists came through town the other day...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWkHh4THIVc

 

[Astronuc]

The American Energy Innovation Council is pushing for more government and private investment in energy innovation.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/09/14/am-bill-gates-on-the-importance-of-energy-research-for-the-future/
http://www.americanenergyinnovation.org/
http://www.americanenergyinnovation.org/full-report

Interestingly, there are several organizations that use the phrase Energy Innovation or Energy Innovations in their title, e.g.,

http://www.energyinnovations.com/
http://www.seiinc.org/

 

[mheslep]

The American Energy Innovation Council is pushing for more government and private investment in energy innovation.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/09/14/am-bill-gates-on-the-importance-of-energy-research-for-the-future/
http://www.americanenergyinnovation.org/
http://www.americanenergyinnovation.org/full-report
...

Bad timing on their part for a PR campaign

Solyndra Bankruptcy Reveals Dark Clouds in Solar Power Industry

Solyndra had received $527 million in federal loans authorized by a program in the 2009 stimulus act.

 

[OmCheeto]

Bad timing on their part for a PR campaign

Solyndra Bankruptcy Reveals Dark Clouds in Solar Power Industry

Running a new business.

I plan on starting one when I retire. (1021 days. tick. tick. tick.)

SolarWorld
Revenue €1.305 billion (2010)
Operating income €192.8 million (2010)
Profit €87.3 million (2010)
Total assets €2.635 billion (end 2010)
Total equity €922.9 million (end 2010)
Employees 2,380 (end 2010)

Of course, it will not be based on 20th century thought processes.

And of course, I will require the services of a chemist, a mathematician, an electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer, a marketing expert, an accountant, several software engineers, and a small army of technicians.

 

[Astronuc]

Bad timing on their part for a PR campaign

Solyndra Bankruptcy Reveals Dark Clouds in Solar Power Industry

Spectrawatt also closed down.

 

[mheslep]

Spectrawatt also closed down.

Yes there are others, but they didn't take half a billion in government loans down with them. AEIC is calling for "more government" on the tail of that lost taxpayer money, seemingly oblivious to the the Solyndra case.

 

[OmCheeto]

Yes there are others, but they didn't take half a billion in government loans down with them. AEIC is calling for "more government" on the tail of that lost taxpayer money, seemingly oblivious to the the Solyndra case.

They should just give me all the goodies. I know how to run a business. (well, ok, not yet)

But it's difficult to analyze the problem in a mixed socio-economic mode world.

the Chinese government provided more than $30 billion, billion with a B, to their solar companies.

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/14/140477571/how-to-u-s-solar-companies-compare-to-chinas"

How does an upstart U.S. company compete with 50 cents an hour wages, and getting 1/20th the financial backing that China provides?

This is actually why I posted the financial statistics for Solarworld, the largest U.S. manufacturer of solar panels: Profit €87.3 million (2010)

Hardly the profits of Exxon($11 billion), GE($14 billion), or a multiple of seasoned companies.

Some may question whether a communist country can compete with a capitalist country, but I have to ask, can our companies compete in such an environment?

 

[mheslep]

They should just give me all the goodies. I know how to run a business. (well, ok, not yet)

But it's difficult to analyze the problem in a mixed socio-economic mode world.

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/14/140477571/how-to-u-s-solar-companies-compare-to-chinas"

How does an upstart U.S. company compete with 50 cents an hour wages, and getting 1/20th the financial backing that China provides?

Couple responses:

1. I have little faith in the accuracy of the finance figure from that source on China, and in any case the claim is collective to all Chinese solar, not one company.
2. The Solyndra case is a showcase example of why government should be at least reticent about funding industry.
3. In answer to your main question, see Apple. Do the high margin smart work here in the US, do the low margin repetitive labor there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage" , by far the largest in the world, and sell to the Chinese and every body else in the world who wants to make silicon wafers.
4. Keep Chinese job competition in mind the next time you see a politician who thinks the best thing for Fish and Wildlife Service armed federal agents to do is http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-...9a26852ee014a8&biw=1280&bih=939&pf=p&pdl=500"

This is actually why I posted the financial statistics for Solarworld, the largest U.S. manufacturer of solar panels: Profit €87.3 million (2010)

See the '€' there? That's a German based company.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Couple responses:

1. I have little faith in the accuracy of the finance figure from that source on China, and in any case the claim is collective to all Chinese solar, not one company.

1. 
   
   

   Winning will require substantial investments. Last year, for example, the China Development Bank offered more than $30 billion in financing to Chinese solar manufacturers, about 20 times more than U.S.-backed loans to solar manufacturers," Poneman wrote.

   http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...a-and-4-other-companies-have-hit-rock-bottom/
   
   

   [*]The Solyndra case is a showcase example of why government should be at least reticent about funding industry.

   
   Why? Start-up industries always have a high failure rate. It doesn't matter if the investments are public or private. It is unfortunate but not earth-shaking that they bet on the wrong horse. Also, 0.5 billion of the 25 billion that went to renewable energy companies, is about 2%. Are you really surprised that we would lose 2% in high-risk investements? If the news doesn't get much worse, say if 5% of the total is lost to failures, 95% is a strikingly good success rate. Even 90% success would be a fantastic hit rate.
   
   

   [*]In answer to your main question, see Apple. Do the high margin smart work here in the US, do the low margin repetitive labor there.

   
   I have been in the thick of eliminating labor jobs with automation for the last fifteen years. When you automate, you create fewer but better jobs. Many forms of industry lend themselves to nearly complete automation. There are even "lights out" plants where, in theory, the plant can operate without any workers, however these have been problematic. But the point is that the relationship between production and labor continues to evolve. As this happens, foreign producers lose some of their advantage.
   
   As for your comments about enforcing laws against the use of illegal and protected wood products, are you suggesting that the same law doesn't apply to imports from China? What IS your point here; that we should lower our standards to those of foreign producers?

 

[Allenman]

I didn't finger through this entire thread yet, but wanted to see what you guys think about this for a plan.

-There are roughly 160 million telephone poles in the united states. If we were to begin trying to retrofit each one with either a small solar or small VAWT power station on top, that would be a substantial gain in renewable energy, even if they only produced 1kw each (they should be sized for the pole they are mounted on though). I'd estimate over the course of 10 years, this would cost roughly $500mil a year.

-Place electrolysis stations at various points on the grid to separate water and produce hydrogen for fuel in case there is an overload of renewable power. Over 10 years this may cost about $500mil a year.

-Require that all fossil fuel plants and waste-to-energy plants retrofit their exhaust to aid in the growth of algae for biofuels by the year 2021.

-Utilize some desert from Arizona and New Mexico to do large scale algae farming for biodiesel and ethanol. I don't know how much that would cost

-Subsidize the implementation of (more) biofuel gas stations, or conversion of existing gas stations to sell biofuels.

-Provide government research grants to those who are developing new energy saving devises and new ways of producing renewable energy. At least $200mil/year.


This is mostly on top of what is already being done.

 

[russ_watters]

How big of a solar panel are you talking about? I'm seeing a typical price for a 1.5 sq meter panel at about $330. 160 million of them over 10 years is $5 billion a year, just to buy the solar panel: no installation, no controls or inverter to connect it to the grid. So you'll probably need to double or triple that.

Such panels have a peak power of 230W. The sum of all the peaks would be 36,800 megawatts. Spread out and not tracking the sun, you'll probably really max out at a third of that; 12,000 megawatts, which is roughly equal to 12 nuclear reactors, at a cost of perhaps 15 nuclear reactors (which, of course, generate energy 24/7, not just during the day). It still might be worth doing, but it is marginal.

 

[OmCheeto]

...

See the '€' there? That's a German based company.

A German based company that a while back invested, um, $500,000,000 in my state.
They recently announced that they were shutting down their California based production facility, for financial reasons of course.

http://www.oregonlive.com/argus/index.ssf/2011/09/solarworld_beams_all_productio.html"

And what was it I just posted on facebook?

Solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity was added in more than 100 countries during 2010, ensuring that PV remained the world’s fastest growing power-generation technology.

ref: http://www.ren21.net/Portals/97/documents/GSR/GSR2011_Master18.pdf"

Solyndra cost the average American taxpayer about $5. Just imagine if everyone had invested $100 in the company. Then maybe China wouldn't be the worlds biggest manufacturer of solar panels. I'm glad Obama invited some kids to the white house who are smart enough to invent new things, rather than stand around with their http://www.whitewatercharters.co.uk/wrasse-fishing-photos.htm", like so many people seem to do nowadays.

(profanity toned down ala LisaB mode)

Almost all of my investments are in "Gore" like technologies. It pains me to see other countries leading the way.

But I would like to thank you for the AMAT tip. I've never seen a 102,000% increase in a stock before.

 

[danielandpenn]

I think it would be beneficial to use third world nations' agriculturally-poor land to construct energy fields, like CST fields or wind turbine fields. This way, they can trade energy for food and we have a fix for poverty and starvation, as well as improving environmental conditions.

 

[Allenman]

How big of a solar panel are you talking about? I'm seeing a typical price for a 1.5 sq meter panel at about $330. 160 million of them over 10 years is $5 billion a year, just to buy the solar panel: no installation, no controls or inverter to connect it to the grid. So you'll probably need to double or triple that.

Such panels have a peak power of 230W. The sum of all the peaks would be 36,800 megawatts. Spread out and not tracking the sun, you'll probably really max out at a third of that; 12,000 megawatts, which is roughly equal to 12 nuclear reactors, at a cost of perhaps 15 nuclear reactors (which, of course, generate energy 24/7, not just during the day). It still might be worth doing, but it is marginal.

Not all of them would require a solar panel. In most places it would be beneficial to find or test which would be more cost effective (solar or wind)... But yeah you're right; I think I did really low-ball that one...

 

[OmCheeto]

Not all of them would require a solar panel. In most places it would be beneficial to find or test which would be more cost effective (solar or wind)... But yeah you're right; I think I did really low-ball that one...

Ha ha! It does pay to do the math once in a while. 3 days after the start of the 2003 Iraq invasion, I wrote a one page, dual time-line, future history story, about how things might turn out. Here is a small excerpt:

January 17, 2009
...
Fearing another "War for Oil", as he termed it, President Powell funneled billions into photovoltaic technology companies. This, along with a $3/gallon gasoline tax, weaned America off of its foreign oil dependency within one year. Being able to travel for virtually nothing, the American people quickly amassed trillions of dollars in excess wealth. The rest of the world quickly followed America's lead.

President Powell, fed up with the politics of Washington, refused to run for a 2nd term.

...

I just ran the calculations, and a $3/gal gas tax would have generated $225 billion dollars in tax revenue per year. This would have paid for ~30 billion watts of PV panels back then. I just checked wiki, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaics_companies" (most of which are Chinese btw) only delivered about 10 billion watts of panels last year.

ps. My story was never meant to be made public, nor should you take it seriously, as it was just a stress reliever for me. But it is funny how many things I wrote have come to pass. "A black president? Get real..."

 

[OmCheeto]

I think it would be beneficial to use third world nations' agriculturally-poor land to construct energy fields, like CST fields or wind turbine fields. This way, they can trade energy for food and we have a fix for poverty and starvation, as well as improving environmental conditions.

It is interesting to see how symbiotic we are, as an economically disparate species. I might need you on my staff within the next 5 years.

Started in 1996, the programme has come as a god-send in a country of 145 million, where 80% people live in poverty and 70% have no access to grid electricity. They have to rely on highly polluting Kerosene oil and diesel generators for lighting and depend on bio-mass, wood, cow dung and crop residue for cooking, which not only create indoor pollution but, through misuse of resources, lead to deforestation, soil erosion and floods.

From a humble beginning of 228 homes in 1997, Grameen Shakti now powers over 135,000 homes, currently adding 5,000 homes every month using photovoltaic technology. Three million trees have been planted under the plantation scheme.

bolding mine

!

I have to go quickly, as my laptop is behaving quite as though as if it is possessed!

Ciao!

 

[sketch]

Groups of houses or apartments to share high power appliances such as vacuum cleaners, tumble driers, fridges and freezers etc.

More internal electrics to run on 12v, with the power supplied via small windmills and solar arrays.

Larger windmills to store higher voltage using capacitors or flywheels to store energy for use in the higher-powered equipment.

Allotments/vegetable patches/chickens/etc.

If you yield more produce then a reduction in rent or mortgage owed applies.

Simple really.

 

[Pkruse]

I see lots of suggestions that fit with sketch's ideas above, things that are all within our current level of technology. While these are technically feasible, I think we need to be realistic as to what is politically acceptable. (That also implies economically viable.) Engineers can develop all sorts of good ideas, but if the market can't sell it, it goes nowhere. Nothing that restricts our growth in living standard is acceptable to the majority of people today, and I don't see that changing.

So perhaps we can start with the assumption of how can we provide ever increasing amounts of energy at a reasonable cost and minimum or no effect on the environment. I see a huge amount of money being spent today researching many ideas that could bring that holy grail a little bit closer, but any research that is potentially economically viable is kept secret. The developers take great pains to make sure that nobody knows about it until they are ready to go to market, and even then they hold the details very close to their chests. Ideas with little or no potential economic potential get published freely, but that stuff just is not going to sell.

I personally would be very interested in carbon sequestering proposals, some of which look like they could very well result in a coal fired plant with near zero emissions. Some propose to completely redesigning the nuclear power plant to eliminate the possibility of a meltdown or other serious hazard, the recycling of nuclear fuel so it need not be stored for such a long time in large quantities, and how to make power with the spent fuel so it need not be stored at all. The power industry is currently investing heavily in gas turbines. How can we make those more efficient or less expensive? How can we use very low grade fuel, like land fill gas with only five percent methane? What about these new plasma systems for completely breaking down hazardous and non-hazardous wastes into clean fuel? All this represents research currently under way, but it is very difficult to get information on it. If anyone in this forum has expertise in these or similar ideas, let’s talk about it.

This thread is just too big to be useful. What do you folks think about starting separate threads for separate ideas?