Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Solar Power & Space Thread (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Postby lorenzo » Sat 02 Apr 2005, 13:03:47

How about solar chimneys in the Sahara? Very cheap, very feasible, very powerful. An ocean cable from the Sahara to Europe, the USA and one to China is very doable. And a million times more feasible than lunar power stations.

Still, this kind of lunar fantasy concepts is important. They show us how much better earthly solutions are.
The Beginning is Near!
User avatar
lorenzo
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat 01 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Postby BlisteredWhippet » Sat 02 Apr 2005, 18:20:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n fact, isn't the U.S. flag still flying up there? :P


No, it is not. Its sitting in a storage vault in the Hollywood studios somewhere.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')In a word, the solution to peak oil is the grid.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the grid is not any more sustainable than peak oil. The grid is just an energy carrier. The instant demand outstrips supply you have rolling blackouts. LSP will have to feed the grid, on demand, 24 hours a day. The receiver sites are already in place- they are U.S. military bases.

LSP will obviously be an outgrowth from the bureacracy that $1 trillion dollars put in place by Reagan's insane "Star Wars". If LSP gets the green light, defense contractors and the Pentagon will finally have what they've always wanted- space, and the entire world by the balls. The existence of LSP will justify creating the Star Wars system they've always wanted.

What if we fund LSP and it turns out like Star Wars? A multi-trillion dollar money pit sucking funds from the public and putting it in the pocket of big defense contractors. Its a win-win for them even if its a pipe dream.
User avatar
BlisteredWhippet
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005, 04:00:00

Postby Omnitir » Sat 02 Apr 2005, 19:05:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')I wonder how long it would take to nudge a medium sized asteroid into a geosynchronous orbit.

It would take about two years, just to get the probe/robot to an appropriate asteroid. Considering that the robot would then need to begin complex automations in order to essentially turn the asteroid into a spacecraft, it would probably need another two years before even being ready to begin to nudge the asteroid. Then the return trip would probably take at least another two years. And of course designing and building such a program would also take several years. So I’d imagine we’d be waiting about a decade or so before the asteroid is parked in orbit. So yes, it’s a long-term, high-risk investment.

Still if it worked and we aimed for an NEA high in volatile gases, it would be rather helpful having several trillion tonnes of methane and other hydrocarbons delivered to the Earth in about ten years…

A much quicker payoff is the current plan NASA is developing of sending astronauts to the moon to develop our extraterrestrial (no, not aliens!) activities, including the extraction of liquid oxygen for use as spacecraft propellent. If the effects of PO aren’t as devastating as quickly as many people envision, then perhaps we can achieve something useful before it’s too late? Here’s hoping.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')In fact, isn't the U.S. flag still flying up there?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')No, it is not. Its sitting in a storage vault in the Hollywood studios somewhere.


:roll:
Oh come on, you don’t honestly believe the U.S. succeeded in fooling the world by faking the moon landings do you? It’s because of people that believe things like that, that make people think peak oil is just another extremism cult. There are massive amounts of evidence proving the U.S. went to the moon. There is zero evidence to the contrary. Stop watching Fox and get real.
User avatar
Omnitir
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat 02 Apr 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Down Under
Top

Postby BlisteredWhippet » Sat 02 Apr 2005, 22:21:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Oh come on, you don’t honestly believe the U.S. succeeded in fooling the world by faking the moon landings do you?


April Fools.

Although I do kind of not believe it. 8O

[smilie=glasses7.gif] [smilie=glasses6.gif]

The CIA would like to remind you that all voice and data communications are monitored 24 hrs a day, around the globe.

That's Echelon. Do you believe that?
User avatar
BlisteredWhippet
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Postby Andy » Sun 03 Apr 2005, 17:05:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Johndenver', 'A')nother problem is energy storage. What do you do when sun goes down on the Sonoran Desert? This is a very severe problem with all terrestrial solar. The solar has to be parasitic on a waste generating process, like nuclear or coal.


We must remember that not all terrestrial solar suffers from intermittency. I can think of ocean thermal that is also base load. Solar chimneys are also effectively base load. And of course, hydro is also base load. I think the moon based solar idea is not ready for prime time at the moment. There are many underinvestigated terrestrial options just begging to be given a chance coupled with the inevitable downscaling of our activities. These obviously should be pursued before ambitious moon based solar.
User avatar
Andy
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Sun 16 May 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Postby cube » Sun 03 Apr 2005, 19:15:34

Why should we limit ourselves to the moon. I propose we construct a dyson sphere! :-D

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t is an artificial hollow sphere of matter around a star designed to capture nearly all of the star's radiated energy for industrial use.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Image
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Postby Omnitir » Sun 03 Apr 2005, 20:33:55

Why bother? The governments/big corporations/stone masons or someone already have working perpetual motion/free energy machines ready to release at the last moment. They keep them in the same building as the equipment used to fake the moon landings, the alien spacecrafts, Elvis, and the Star Gate.
User avatar
Omnitir
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat 02 Apr 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Down Under

Postby mortifiedpenguin » Mon 04 Apr 2005, 23:19:10

Haha. Some people actually believe we never went to the moon. Just so you know, we have. I can prove it right now. Fear:

Moon Hoax Debunked'd

8)
mortifiedpenguin
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri 15 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Using Fab Labs for Lunar Construction

Postby Prometheus » Mon 11 Apr 2005, 14:54:51

It is my belief that within a few years time, building solar panels on the Moon could be done far easier than before, and the simple reason is personal fabricators. Now, the holy grail is using these fab-labs to reproduce themselves, which engineers are very close to achieving.

This is mainly a thought experiment.

My proposal has a lunar base launched, which will house a hydroponics unit, and quarters for perhaps up to four people, all engineers. This would work with with just telepresence from Earth too, and without the base.

The main machines to be launched to the Moon will be a solar-powered fab-lab and a solar-powered lunar dust mining machine. From here, building the solar panels will simply be an exercise in computer programming. Once deployed, the mining machine will begin mining the lunar dust for more materials. These materials will then be shipped to the personal fabricators, which will replicate itself. These two fabricators will then replicate themselves. One of the fabricators will design more minin equipment. When there are about eight fabricators, then there are more things that can be built, such as robotic constructors. It is possible to make a rocket entirely of lunar material, using solid rocket fuel (like the boosters on the space shuttle) using metals and oxygen. The robotic constructors can take the rocket parts constructed by the fabricators, and build a rocket.

Let's say that it takes two weeks for a fab-lab to reproduce, which is far too conservative of an estimate. If we leave out the construction of other machines such as miners, robotic constructors, etc., then we can have an extremely robust manufacturing system in a year. If each fabricator reproduces itself, then in less than a year, we will have 16 million fabrication units. Of course, many of these fabricators will go to work to produce other things, but in a year, there would still be millions of fabricators. Where there are enough of these fab-labs, construction of solar panels can begin, and robots will put these together.
User avatar
Prometheus
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon 11 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Postby Bubbling_Crude » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 10:40:37

There is another solar technology that can continue to produce energy even at night and on cloudy days: the SunDish. It uses a Stirling genset, which can be heated either with focused sunlight or by external combustion using landfill gas or methane. The Sundish was given a trial run at the Pentagon and later at the Pima Maricopa Indian reservation near Tempe, Arizona. At just 20-25kW per unit, it won't be powering the entire grid anytime soon, but it may provide a good solution for remote areas, industrial parks, etc.
User avatar
Bubbling_Crude
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Postby Devil » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 11:21:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bubbling_Crude', 'T')he Sundish was given a trial run at the Pentagon


It could work on all the hot air spouted by the military (would work even better in Congress or, above all, at the White House) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Devil
User avatar
Devil
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue 06 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Cyprus
Top

Postby BlisteredWhippet » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 15:41:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bubbling_Crude', 'T')he Sundish was given a trial run at the Pentagon


It could work on all the hot air spouted by the military (would work even better in Congress or, above all, at the White House) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Department of Defense....

Defense against humanity, sanity, the future, democracy, a rational budget.....

When Kucinich recommended establishing a cabinet-level "Department of Peace" in 2004 it made me cringe because I knew the idiot majority (which I like to call "The Borg") would immediately bury the idea.

A DoD plan would likely cost billions in public money and the benefits would first go to the military for operations and on to corporate cash cows.

A DoP plan would likely cost far less, incorporate nonprofit funding, develop open-source, and distribute resources based on need.

Consequently I would support LSP if it were proposed by a DoP. It would likely be openly discussed, and a developed proposal would probably by viable.

A DoD proposal will likewly be a huge money sink, incorporate too many kickbacks and proprietary development rights grants to the usual Big War Profiteers, and the end result is likely a poorly-performing, inefficient design, if it gets anywhere at all.

The crux of this discussion is whether or not its likely that a big military-run "Manhattan Project" for energy technology is going to save us. Some of us assume that the military is the only way to do it- yet the SpaceShipOne experiment proved that civilian, non-military projects are just as viable. Imagine what could be acheived with cooperation- not direction- by the military, along with an open-source development framework and a project goal with more altruistic motivations.

The bottom line is, if we're looking for a radical new energy source that can't be controlled and is everywhere and essentially "free", we won't get it from the military. That would be like asking the Strategic U.S. Command to implement a system that would limit its ability to dominate. Its not going to happen. Its much more likely that they will offer a reasonable-sounding solution, steal the public money, and bury the project.

Its helpful to remember that the Manhattan Project had as its aim the goal of producing a weapon of massive and brutal destruction, completely outside the bounds of reason, and totally against international laws and even conventional morality. If we want (or need) to create weapons and systems primed for destruction, the military is a logical place to go fishing for implementation. If we want to save the human race, the planet, or raise standards of living, the military is a piss-poor place to look. There needs to be alternatives- and there needs to be people who are willing to take the necessary risks to establish those alternatives.
Last edited by BlisteredWhippet on Tue 12 Apr 2005, 16:54:33, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
BlisteredWhippet
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Postby Bubbling_Crude » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 15:57:54

I'm not sure where the sudden focus on the Department of Defense came in. The SunDish was demonstrated at the Pentagon (yes, DoD), but it was a DOE (Department of Energy) project, coordinating the efforts of STM, SAIC, and others. There was and is nothing whatever militarily oriented about this technology.
User avatar
Bubbling_Crude
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Postby BlisteredWhippet » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 16:52:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bubbling_Crude', 'I')'m not sure where the sudden focus on the Department of Defense came in. The SunDish was demonstrated at the Pentagon (yes, DoD), but it was a DOE (Department of Energy) project, coordinating the efforts of STM, SAIC, and others. There was and is nothing whatever militarily oriented about this technology.


Thats kind of ridiculous to me. The military provides the bulk of money for high-tech pure research- stuff that corporations cannot get into because of the massive risk and uncertain ROI.

NASA, the DOE, and DoD answer to the joint chiefs of staff, and ultimately to the Commander-in-chief (Bush).

From www.doe.gov
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')

The Department has four overriding National Security priorities: insuring the integrity and safety of the country's nuclear weapons; promoting international nuclear safety; advancing nuclear non-proliferation; and, continuing to provided safe, efficient, and effective nuclear power plants for the United States Navy.


All of our proposals here would be militarized in implementation.
User avatar
BlisteredWhippet
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Postby Bubbling_Crude » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 17:20:18

It's ridiculous to assume everything has a military connection as well. By your reasoning, biodiesel will be a 'military solution' because it is being used in some army vehicles. Not everything has a conspiratorial slant to it, despite the best efforts of some here to paint it that way.

On January 26th a demonstration of the SRP "SunDish" was presented by Salt River Project. Present were engineers from Scientific Applications International Corp. (SAIC), DTE Biomass Energy, Arizona Public Service company (APS), and representatives from the American Hydrogen Association, the Arizona Solar Energy Association, and other interested parties.
User avatar
Bubbling_Crude
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Postby BlisteredWhippet » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 17:22:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bubbling_Crude', 'I')t's ridiculous to assume everything has a military connection as well. By your reasoning, biodiesel will be a 'military solution' because it is being used in some army vehicles. Not everything has a conspiratorial slant to it, despite the best efforts of some here to paint it that way.


Hold on buddy...

Its 2005 and peak oil is about to occur. We spend 500 billion on defense and there's about to be an energy crisis.

I'm just pointing at the writing on the wall.
User avatar
BlisteredWhippet
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Postby Bubbling_Crude » Tue 12 Apr 2005, 22:16:08

On Peak Oil happening soon, and of the US's intention of launching warfare on energy-rich regions around the planet, I have no doubt. But to summarily pronounce SunDish or other technologies as somehow unfit because of a perceived connection with the military-industrial complex is misguided at best. This technology was around before DOE funding arrived, and has survived since its withdrawal.

The SunDish is a unique application of thermal, rather than photovoltaic, solar power. The ability of its Stirling motor genset to continue producing power at night or on cloudy days makes it that much better. It is one technology that has been extensively tested in real world conditions, and it works now.

LSP and other exotic technologies may eventually produce results, but as we both agree, the Peak draws nigh, and we need solutions soon. Or yesterday, preferably. I do not believe that this solution will arrive in the form of a single miraculous invention or innovation, but from the continued development of numerous technologies already available. A singular pie-in-the-sky concept such as LSP, or cold-fusion, or zero-point energy, is highly unlikely to provide our energy needs in the near to midterm. And in the meantime, the energy resources required of such a venture will be increasingly needed to produce food and heat for the surviving population.
User avatar
Bubbling_Crude
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

THE Solar Farm Thread (merged)

Postby oliveoil » Mon 25 Jul 2005, 12:43:40

How about building a lot of space elevators (they only cost about $20bn apparently...) It would be easy then to ship materials up into space and create huge solar cell platforms. Sunlight is more potent up there so we could generate more energy this way.

Is this feasable?
Last edited by Ferretlover on Sun 05 Jul 2009, 09:13:51, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Merge thread.
User avatar
oliveoil
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Postby Caoimhan » Mon 25 Jul 2005, 12:51:49

Where the hell did you pull the "20bn" number from? We don't yet have the material science to be able to build one.
User avatar
Caoimhan
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Tue 10 May 2005, 03:00:00

Postby oliveoil » Mon 25 Jul 2005, 13:09:50

Ok, the number is $5 billion... but projected time is about 12 years to build one..



read more there.Webpage Title
User avatar
oliveoil
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron