Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.
Post a reply

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 04:59:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')been killed by that same lack of faith - fission power.


Of course... another conspiracy...

Until breeder reactors can extend nuclear fuel through reuse... it's also a pipe-dream I'm afraid.

Who said ANYTHING about conspiracy? :roll:

Society lost faith, seduced by cheap sensation and eco scaremongering. What was needed was a power source that could produce copious power with no CO2, and do so until fusion was a practical reality. Fast breeders were a nice to have, and we would have them if the various research programmes hadn't been cut. Its perfectly possible to build such stations today, as it is we can build conventional fission reactors.

But we don't.

The pipe dream here is with those that sit back smoking *something*, looking at the abyss coming over the horizon and continue to talk about dreamlands of 'powerdown', 'dieoff' and 'arable economies'. They aren't workable, implementable or acceptable real solutions, they avoid the real facts which say 'ever forward, never back'.

A crash building programme of mass produced fission power stations, started today, could stave off the worst of the impact of peak oil. So where is that programme ?

Oh, I forgot, the french did it in the 1970s, and currently have 78% of the power generation from nuclear.
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby coyote » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 06:02:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'S')orry pal, but your industry shill's credibility is poor at best.

Try quoting sombody with no financial bias.

Okay, fair enough. Then how about the Department of Energy:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hrough the course of this testing, the fuel economy of HEV fleets has been monitored and analyzed to determine the "real world" performance of their hybrid energy systems, particularly the battery. While the initial "real world" fuel economy of these vehicles has typically been less than that evaluated by the manufacturer and varies significantly with environmental conditions, the fuel economy and, therefore, battery performance, has remained stable over vehicle life (160,000 miles)...

Although HEV fuel economy is initially less than that reported by the EPA, the fuel economy remains stable over the vehicle life as shown in Table 2. To maintain fuel economy stable over the life of an HEV, either battery performance must remain stable or any decrease in performance must be less than the performance margin designed into the hybrid energy system. Additional testing will be conducted, including battery capacity and power to determine the degree, if any, of battery degradation in vehicles completing Accelerated Reliability Testing. However, it is clear from data collected to date, that battery performance is sufficient to provide stable vehicle fuel economy over a 160,000 mile HEV life. [Emphasis mine.]

DoE: Karner.pdf

... referencing the AVTA

Note that, as the shill said, they simply stopped testing after 160,000 miles, and that there was little or no degradation of the hybrid battery performance over that time. Just how much longer than that the battery will last hasn't been formally studied yet.

And speaking of shills, you might note that CNW, which authored the 'dust to dust' report, is a marketing firm that includes "major automobile manufacturers" among their clients, according to the About Us page of their website. Talk about financial bias. My opinion remains: their study is bogus. They ignored life-cycle data and included ridiculous R&D costs, throwing the entire analysis out of whack. If you do it that way, you can produce any results you want.
Lord, here comes the flood
We'll say goodbye to flesh and blood
If again the seas are silent in any still alive
It'll be those who gave their island to survive...
User avatar
coyote
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun 23 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: East of Eden
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby coyote » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 06:33:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'T')he pipe dream here is with those that sit back smoking *something*, looking at the abyss coming over the horizon and continue to talk about dreamlands of 'powerdown', 'dieoff' and 'arable economies'.

Not exactly 'dreamlands,' unless you're referring to nightmares.

Aaron is right. A whole new body of knowledge is required, and we're not even making any significant moves in that direction. It's not just energy, it's the environment we live in and have so badly trashed, our paradigm of consumption and our whole way of life. Nuclear energy might help a little in the short term, but it's basically just a continuance of our current way of doing things. And in the long term, could be very harmful. Are you certain that post-Peak we'll remain perfectly able to maintain and protect the most dangerous substance known? And do so while providing it to the world?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '.')..eco scaremongering...

Wait.
Lord, here comes the flood
We'll say goodbye to flesh and blood
If again the seas are silent in any still alive
It'll be those who gave their island to survive...
User avatar
coyote
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun 23 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: East of Eden
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 06:50:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '
')Nuclear energy might help a little in the short term, but it's basically just a continuance of our current way of doing things. And in the long term, could be very harmful. Are you certain that post-Peak we'll remain perfectly able to maintain and protect the most dangerous substance known? And do so while providing it to the world?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '.')..eco scaremongering...

Wait.

If we had stuck with fission reactors we wouldn't be in the straights we are in now. You can do a lot in 3 decades towards improving and refining a technology.

Imagine if most of the first world was now where France is - 80% power from nuclear. Climate change would be less of an issue and our approach would probably be to phase out fossil fuels for power derived from more nuclear stations. Peak oil wouldn't really be a big worry. It would be further into the future, and we would have more options to deal with it. Focus could be on population stabilisation and reduction.

And maybe 20 years down the line we would have commercial fusion stations.

We didn't need to live in a world where irrationality ruled, where the market is held up as a god rather than a tool and where we ended up thinking progress was a bad thing and 4 billion deaths a good idea.

I'll leave you with one thought. Which is environmentally more problematic, mass change in the global climate resulting in die offs in flora and fauna, together with significant sea level rise; or relatively small amounts of nuclear waste buried in rock deep underground?

As a civilisation we've been making some bad, short term choices over the last half a century.
Arcane Domain
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 07:18:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s a civilisation we've been making some bad, short term choices over the last half a century.

What's the maximum production volume for uranium globally?

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
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 08:24:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s a civilisation we've been making some bad, short term choices over the last half a century.

What's the maximum production volume for uranium globally?


http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclo ... serves.htm

Sufficient.

And don't forget, if we hadn't taken a left turn we would probably have fast breeders, large scale fuel reprocessing by now. We don't need a solution that lasts for thousands of years, just one that gets us from here to fusion reactors.
Arcane Domain
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 08:32:30

Google it a bit more...
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
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 09:23:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'G')oogle it a bit more...

What, until there is a site that agrees with you?

With all the politics that surrounds anything nuclear, do you think there are any non partisan sites? All I can see is that ore quality varies, and that there has been little work on improving extraction techniques to deal with lower grade ore. Couple that with the previous statements on fast breeders and timescales needed and unlike you I see no significant problems, only potential solutions.

But let me guess, you're a glass half empty kind of person?
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 09:54:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'G')oogle it a bit more...

What, until there is a site that agrees with you?

With all the politics that surrounds anything nuclear, do you think there are any non partisan sites? All I can see is that ore quality varies, and that there has been little work on improving extraction techniques to deal with lower grade ore. Couple that with the previous statements on fast breeders and timescales needed and unlike you I see no significant problems, only potential solutions.

But let me guess, you're a glass half empty kind of person?


We have a forum search feature as well ya know...
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
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 11:12:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')We have a forum search feature as well ya know...

And ?

Is a forum search suddenly going to make nuclear power less of a solution? Is it suddenly going to mean we didn't give up on a viable alternative to a hydrocarbon dependency three decades ago? Is it going to make a crash fission programme, couple with strong fusion R&D not a matter of debate?

You started this thread by basically ringing a doomer bell and atoning "the end is nigh". Yet you steadfastly avoiding taking seriously were basic science HAS provided a viable alternative to the hydrocarbon culture, and where we as a civilisation have turned away from that. You also avoid talking about the idea that maybe that is exactly the fault line we should be fixing now.

It might not be what's on your mind as a solution, but is it really a case of not enough primary science; or more a case of bad priorities and poor foresight?

There is a concept in aircraft testing - defining the envelope. Where are the limits on performance and maneuver that define what the aircraft can and can't do.

As far as the envelope of the global civilisation is concerned we know that continued hydrocarbon use is outside. We also know that voluntary powerdown is outside and that die off is equivalent to crashing into the side of a hill. A crash fission programme, with R&D and eventual transition to fusion is still within the envelope and needs exploring.
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 12:26:32

I understand very well how you feel.

Take the time to read some of the excellent analysis hosted right here on this forum, and other websites for more information about our nuclear options and the prospects for breeder programs.

PAX
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
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby MonteQuest » Mon 28 Aug 2006, 19:36:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'A')s far as the envelope of the global civilisation is concerned we know that continued hydrocarbon use is outside. We also know that voluntary powerdown is outside and that die off is equivalent to crashing into the side of a hill. A crash fission programme, with R&D and eventual transition to fusion is still within the envelope and needs exploring.


You just don't have a grasp of how the world works, do you?

Energy is not the only limiting factor.

There is population.

Top soil.

Potable water.

Biodiversity.

Arable land.

Climate change.

The die-off is inevitable; it is how nature works.

And a crash fission program is no good without breeder reactors.

You posit a Solution in Isolation.
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

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 05:05:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')You just don't have a grasp of how the world works, do you?

You posit a Solution in Isolation.

I think the problem here is that YOU don't understand how people work. We do not go gentle into that good night, we rage - a lot. We look for ways in which we can stave off death, and if some uncaring types decide to let us die, we storm the barricade and tear down their safe and secure enclaves.

Your die off is no solution. To return to that 'sustainable' population would require so many deaths that I think those scheduled for extermination might just notice. The result would be brutal, violent and destructive. We wouldn't have a civilisation left - it would be the sustainability of the graveyard.

Instead there is the tiniest fraction of a option that gives mankind a future. It involves fission, followed by fusion, coupled with renewables and most of all sane policies that encourage voluntary population reduction and pollution control. Its the tiniest fraction of a chance because it requires intelligent concerted action by those who have got where they are via standing on the backs of others; and then knifing them in the back.

It is however a chance.

Whereas it appears you have resigned yourself to 'the end', some of us think there is hope and opportunity to survive and live. That is via science & technology, as it has every other time mankind has dodged the bullet.

Give up your hopelessness, try and conceive of a world where we don't all die.
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Doly » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 05:17:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')The die-off is inevitable; it is how nature works.

And a crash fission program is no good without breeder reactors.

You posit a Solution in Isolation.


Yes, it is inevitable if all people are willing to do about it is sit expostulating their doomer theories.

Monte, how much has your ecological footprint reduced in all the time you've been posting here?

Because mine, the optimist that does not believe you, is likely to reduce pretty drastically soon. If the world has a soft landing, it's not going to be thanks to you doomers.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Aaron » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 07:20:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')onte, how much has your ecological footprint reduced in all the time you've been posting here?


I have no idea...but I do know he runs http://www.sustainablearizona.org which helps his community find ways to do exactly that.

How many websites or other educational efforts do you run?
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
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby Omnitir » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 08:35:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')You just don't have a grasp of how the world works, do you?

Energy is not the only limiting factor.

There is population.

Top soil.

Potable water.

Biodiversity.

Arable land.

Climate change.

MonteQuest, I suspect you don’t understand the progress that you so adamantly denounce. Everything you list has solutions, and these solutions are rapidly growing in both number and in effectiveness.

If you were to predict the progress of these solutions over the next two decades, no doubt you would model this progress on the past two decades. However the reality would be modelling such progress on the past 60 years, not 20. Innovation is currently doubling every decade. The 21st century will see around 1000 times the innovation that the 20th century enjoyed, and the existing solutions to our problems will be enhanced and implemented within the first few decades of this century. This is the true nature of exponential growth.

Innovation is increasing sufficiently to undo the damage we’ve done on the way to this point. The ‘natural limits’ frequently referred too are actually human made limits that are variable. We passed the planets ‘natural limits’ many centuries ago, and have since constantly been adjusting our man made limits. There is little reason to believe that this will suddenly stop once we switch to alternative energies.
"Mother Nature is a psychopathic bitch, and she is out to get you. You have to adapt, change or die." - Tihamer Toth-Fejel, nanotech researcher/engineer.
User avatar
Omnitir
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat 02 Apr 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Down Under
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby coyote » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 13:45:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Omnitir', 'I')nnovation is increasing sufficiently to undo the damage we’ve done on the way to this point.

That I'm just not seeing. How do you 'undo' mass extinctions? Or topsoil losses? How do you rebuild lost rainforests and wetlands, or reclaim desertified land? These are complex systems; you can't just manufacture species and put them out in the wild, it doesn't work that way. You can't reverse global warming. You can mitigate it somewhat if you work at it (which we're barely doing) but it will still take decades at least to run its course. The oceans -- at some point we're just going to have to wait and hope they repopulate themselves. That of course will have to wait till after the oceans' pH level balances itself out again, again after decades at least. And the global water situation -- may be the most frightening. Aquifers are being depleted fast. How do you create and transport enough water for seven billion people? What happens post-Peak when the U.S. decides it can no longer export ninety million tons of cereal grains every year, not to mention all the soybeans (thirty million tons) and medicine?

Most of our innovation has gone into creating the iPod and its commercial siblings, mostly hydrocarbon-based, non-essential products. Our resource base and pollution sinks are being ground down, quicker all the time. If there's nothing left to work with, innovation becomes fantasy. We can't keep going as we are. We have to power down and learn to live in a changed world.
Lord, here comes the flood
We'll say goodbye to flesh and blood
If again the seas are silent in any still alive
It'll be those who gave their island to survive...
User avatar
coyote
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sun 23 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: East of Eden
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby garyp » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 14:21:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '
')Most of our innovation has gone into creating the iPod and its commercial siblings, mostly hydrocarbon-based, non-essential products. Our resource base and pollution sinks are being ground down, quicker all the time. If there's nothing left to work with, innovation becomes fantasy. We can't keep going as we are. We have to power down and learn to live in a changed world.

See, I think I agree and disagree with you at the same time. Over the past 50 years we have undeniably made bad decisions - one of which was beleiving we could keep trusting to the market as population levels rose to a level sufficent to negate the environment as an inexhaustible resource. We kept on in the same old vein, whilst simultaneously walking away from the one set of tools that could help.

However its a jump from that to saying we are all doomed, innovation is a fantasy and we should all give up and go and sit in a field. With the right attention there is still much that can be done (including negating climate change). However its not a question of if its possible, its a question of if we as a civilisation have the maturity not to give up, but to take the hard decisions that would enable a route to the future.

I hate to say, but I think we aren't mature enough to take that time out. However that's no reason to give up yet. Until its impossible to make the right choises and have the desired effect, its not human to surrender.
User avatar
garyp
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue 18 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby CARVER » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 14:56:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', '.').. and most of all sane policies that encourage voluntary population reduction ...

Is it not a die-off if the population reduction happens voluntarily? Can someone give me the definition of: die-off?
User avatar
CARVER
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 396
Joined: Thu 19 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Holland
Top

Re: Primary Science & Asynchronous Development

Unread postby CARVER » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 15:14:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Omnitir', '.').. If you were to predict the progress of these solutions over the next two decades, no doubt you would model this progress on the past two decades. However the reality would be modelling such progress on the past 60 years, not 20.


The reality? The reality is that you don't know if your predictions based on past performance will actually turn into reality, there is no guarantee. We don't know exactly what will happen.
User avatar
CARVER
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 396
Joined: Thu 19 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Holland
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron