Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Green Movement Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN calls for Geo-Green Alternative

Postby maverickdoc » Sat 05 Feb 2005, 20:55:59

I Just saw an Tim Russert interview with him. He is sounding more and more like a neo con.

Here is and interesting commentary by him:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/opini ... 20Friedman


"You give me $18-a-barrel oil and I will give you political and economic reform from Algeria to Iran. All these regimes have huge population bubbles and too few jobs. They make up the gap with oil revenues. Shrink the oil revenue and they will have to open up their economies and their schools and liberate their women so that their people can compete. It is that simple"

TOO BAD HE DOES NOT SAY HOW HE WILL GET OIL PRICES DOWN TO $18
User avatar
maverickdoc
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed 12 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Re: THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN calls for Geo-Green Alternative

Postby BabyPeanut » Sat 05 Feb 2005, 21:24:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('maverickdoc', 'T')OO BAD HE DOES NOT SAY HOW HE WILL GET OIL PRICES DOWN TO $18

Did you read the article by any chance?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')es, there is an alternative to the Euro-wimps and the neocons, and it is the "geo-greens." I am a geo-green. The geo-greens believe that, going forward, if we put all our focus on reducing the price of oil - by conservation
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

green power on slashdot

Postby BabyPeanut » Tue 15 Feb 2005, 21:23:40

BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Re: green power on slashdot

Postby rerere » Tue 15 Feb 2005, 22:12:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'I') liked this post
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl ... d=11675226


Someone, somewhere, at sometime had made a statement 'if every man made structure was covered in solar panels, we'd all be OK in the US WRT power.' Eventually, this statement was repeated to me.

Given the numbers in the link, the original statement just might be true.
User avatar
rerere
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Postby basketballjones » Tue 15 Feb 2005, 23:42:55

what he doesn't say but is a logical extension is that the area you'd need to cover in solar panels to generate the currect energy consumption of the US is way more than is viable.

I also find it quite amazing that there has been no discussion of peak oil on slashdot.
User avatar
basketballjones
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon 17 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: sydney, australia

Postby JayHMorrison » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 00:18:16

Viewing solar from the basis that it must provide 100% is silly. Without storage systems of electricity, it is pointless.

Just from a grid stability standpoint, I have read articles that it is difficult to manage more than 10% to 15% of the total power as solar. Above 20% wind is getting tough to manage.

Solar power has an advantage as a distributed power source in homes and buildings, to suppliment the power of that specific building. Any excess power can be resold to the grid via net metering.

Centralized solar power makes no sense.
Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
User avatar
JayHMorrison
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu 17 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Unknown

Postby BabyPeanut » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 07:36:13

We need to legislate against that "night" thing. Solar power takes quite a hit when night falls. Clouds are bad enough but it gets so dark at night. :razz:
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Postby Aaron » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 07:57:08

The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Postby BabyPeanut » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 08:00:40

My point people love to post how much energy solar produces but never speak of the fact that you can only get that energy for part of the day.

If I was there school teacher I would make them write

Solar power is intermittent.

100 times on the chalk board.
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Postby JayHMorrison » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 08:30:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'M')y point people love to post how much energy solar produces but never speak of the fact that you can only get that energy for part of the day.


Fortunately, solar power works best during peak demand hours. The most intensive power demand is during the summer on hot days. As a source of electric power during the day, which is when demand is higher, solar has a solid future.

I dont think anyone is arguing for solar as base load power. Coal and nuclear will filll that role.
Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
User avatar
JayHMorrison
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu 17 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Unknown

Postby BabyPeanut » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 09:07:22

A better battery technology or a better electrical transmission technology would make solar and wind a bigger player.

With a battery solar would work at night and wind would not need a breeze all the time. Charge it when there's the most power and discharge in the time of need.

With better transmission you could harness the wind where it alwyas blows and the sun where there's never a cloud and pipe it to the less abundant areas.
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Postby clv101 » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 09:35:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'S')olar power is intermittent.
So demand needs to be made intermittent tolerant.
User avatar
clv101
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed 02 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Bristol, UK
Top

Postby Wildwell » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 09:49:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('clv101', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'S')olar power is intermittent.
So demand needs to be made intermittent tolerant.


Yeah but that's impossible in the real world. If solar was SUCH a good energy supplier we would have replaced coal fire and nuclear power stations long ago.
User avatar
Wildwell
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: UK
Top

Postby gnm » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 11:04:54

There is a wonderous invention called batteries that solves the intermittent problem with solar. There are also projects which use the power to produce hydrogen so you can store greater amounts of power than the batteries would handle. But solar panels are really only suited for onsite applications. Line losses and system inefficenies make solar power farms barely feasible. It has been tried before - the Carrizozo (sp?) solar power plant in CA I think was one attempt 20 years ago...

-G
gnm
 

Postby nocar » Wed 16 Feb 2005, 12:02:37

Has anybody with knowledge checked their claim that the solar panels are 30% efficient? I do not know very much about solar, but I believe I have otherwise seen efficiency rates well below 10 percent.

One reason I know very little about solar is that I know that for us, close to the 60th parallell, it can never be the solution. We need power for light and heating in winter when there is no sun - it barely goes above the horizon for a couple of hours and then it is usually cloudy anyway.

No need for AC in our summers, when there is some sun shine.

Still, I have met people with a big solar panel on their sailboat to power their refridgerator. That makes sense - you get power when you most need it. But how many years will the solar panel last - anybody knows?
/nocar
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Greenpeace statement on nuclear

Postby JohnDenver » Sat 05 Mar 2005, 06:50:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he largest uranium mines are in the United States, Canada, France, Australia, South Africa and Russia. Many of the mining areas are on land occupied by indigenous people, for example the Aborigines of Australia.

According to Aboriginal mythology, the Rainbow Serpent, asleep in the earth, guards over those elemental powers which lie outside of humankind’s control. Any attempt to seize these underworld elements will disturb the sleep of the serpent, provoking its vengeance: a terrible deluge of destruction and death.

‘The Rainbow Serpent has been wakened. Men turned into shadows, cancer, women giving birth to jellyfish babies, leukaemia - since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, since the Bravo test in the Bikini Islands, and since the Chernobyl catastrophe in April of 1986, we know that the Rainbow Serpent doesn’t differentiate between uranium’s military and peaceful uses. Death everywhere it touches. But what we perhaps don’t realise is that the destructive properties of uranium are unleashed the moment it’s mined from the ground’. Extracted from the World Uranium Hearing.

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/no. ... fabmi.html

It's interesting that Greenpeace considers tribal religious beliefs to be relevant to sober discussion of the pros and cons of nuclear energy. I don't want my congressman saying: "Yah, I'd vote for nuclear energy if I wasn't so damn scared of that Aborigine snake thing." :razz:
JohnDenver
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Sun 29 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Postby Specop_007 » Sat 05 Mar 2005, 09:51:36

GreenPeace are a bunch of fucking loonies. Like a Democrat thats undergone advanced re-education really.
:-D
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Postby holmes » Sat 05 Mar 2005, 11:10:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'G')reenPeace are a bunch of fucking loonies. Like a Democrat thats undergone advanced re-education really.
:-D


I agree 80 percent. However there is some good in that org. there are alot of green peacers that are now working with the nature conservancy and ranchers and common folks in conservation aquisitions all over the country to help them against the pressures of big corparations and there like that are stomping the constitution into the ground. So I wouldnt say they are totally out of touch. They have changed my mind a little.
holmes
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2382
Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Greenpeace statement on nuclear

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 05 Mar 2005, 12:02:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he largest uranium mines are in the United States, Canada, France, Australia, South Africa and Russia. Many of the mining areas are on land occupied by indigenous people, for example the Aborigines of Australia.

According to Aboriginal mythology, the Rainbow Serpent, asleep in the earth, guards over those elemental powers which lie outside of humankind’s control. Any attempt to seize these underworld elements will disturb the sleep of the serpent, provoking its vengeance: a terrible deluge of destruction and death.

‘The Rainbow Serpent has been wakened. Men turned into shadows, cancer, women giving birth to jellyfish babies, leukaemia - since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, since the Bravo test in the Bikini Islands, and since the Chernobyl catastrophe in April of 1986, we know that the Rainbow Serpent doesn’t differentiate between uranium’s military and peaceful uses. Death everywhere it touches. But what we perhaps don’t realise is that the destructive properties of uranium are unleashed the moment it’s mined from the ground’. Extracted from the World Uranium Hearing.

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/no. ... fabmi.html

It's interesting that Greenpeace considers tribal religious beliefs to be relevant to sober discussion of the pros and cons of nuclear energy. I don't want my congressman saying: "Yah, I'd vote for nuclear energy if I wasn't so damn scared of that Aborigine snake thing." :razz:


At The World Uranium Hearing held in Salzburg, Austria in September 1992, witnesses from all continents including indigenous speakers and scientists testified to the falsity of the terminology used and sanctioned by industry and governments world-wide. Fifty years of military and civilian use of nuclear power meant war for those whose homelands have been used for mining and processing of uranium and chosen for atomic weapons testing, atomic energy production and atomic waste disposal. Every day human life and the natural world are sacrificed along the radioactive trail of our nuclear way.

The stories told by the indigenous delegates constituted an appalling indictment of nuclear colonialism. For it is their homelands, their bodies, and their ancient cultures that are most immediately victimized by nuclear power and nuclear weapons. On their lands, which they hold sacred, 70% of the world's uranium is mined, most of the testing takes place, and radioactive waste is dumped. These crimes are compounded, in virtually every case, by secrecy and deception and intimidation on the part of industry and government.

So, I would say that the views of these indigenous people are quite relevant to the pros and cons of nuclear power. Like any organization for change, Green Peace has it's radicals, but it's goals are for the betterment of the planet. We can't always agree with the means to an end. Some of their members feel radical methods are now necessary, and a strong case can be made to support their position.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Postby Specop_007 » Sat 05 Mar 2005, 12:06:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('holmes', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'G')reenPeace are a bunch of fucking loonies. Like a Democrat thats undergone advanced re-education really.
:-D


I agree 80 percent. However there is some good in that org. there are alot of green peacers that are now working with the nature conservancy and ranchers and common folks in conservation aquisitions all over the country to help them against the pressures of big corparations and there like that are stomping the constitution into the ground. So I wouldnt say they are totally out of touch. They have changed my mind a little.


Oh, I understand that. A case of a few ruining it for the many. I think they quite often go WAY overboard though, but occasionally they do do some good.
Now PETA on the other hand..... :x
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Next

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron