Fight the gas prices

[--Pete]

Hi,

Sustainable living is possible

Simple little math problem for you, Doc. Take the acreage you use to get your sustainable living, divide it by the number of persons you're sustaining there, then multiply it by the population of the USA. Compare the result with the *viable* acreage of the USA. What percentage of the population could live that way, assuming they would want to?

As for me, I'm modern enough, and intelligent enough, to distinguish between 'wife' and 'dishwasher'. Hint, only one of the two is property.

--Pete

[Doc]

Hi,
Simple little math problem for you, Doc. Take the acreage you use to get your sustainable living, divide it by the number of persons you're sustaining there, then multiply it by the population of the USA. Compare the result with the *viable* acreage of the USA. What percentage of the population could live that way, assuming they would want to?

As for me, I'm modern enough, and intelligent enough, to distinguish between 'wife' and 'dishwasher'. Hint, only one of the two is property.

--Pete

But somehow, in spite of being intelligent enough, you missed that I was joking. :PRelax man, that comment was made in fun.

Really though... The dishwashing agreement has been a good thing for a near trouble free marriage. She can't cook. So, I cook, and do all of that hard work in the kitchen, she washes a few plates. She's happy, I am happy, the kitchen is clean, and there has never been anything remotely close to fighting or angry words. As per our agreement, she does the dishes... All of the small lightweight stuff. The cast iron pans and what not? The heavy stuff used for cooking? Guess who does that... Yeah, that's right, me.

And I know that there are problems supporting a population as large as ours. My point, if there is one, is that the people who can drop off the grid, should. It is possible. Responsible living is entirely possible.

As for large populations, do a little googling about earthships, and there is an entire subdivision being built of nothing but earthships. Literally thousands of homes, all of which will generate their own community electricity, recycle all of their own wastewater, live a sustainable life, and generate more food than all of them could possibly eat. Sure, small scale now. But if this community proves viable, and there is no reason why it shouldn't, it means that in the future, it would be possible for us to live a little more responsibily. It will show that all that wasted space, things like the roof on your home, doesn't need to be a waste of space. It could have solar panels, or better yet, a garden. Of course this wouldn't work on a regular home, but on an earthship type home, or the right kind of housing, a garden roof, with several layers of dirt up there, is a great insulator. All that food grown can feed people, or, should the right things be grown, be contributed to community processing for fuel. Bio-diesel or moonshine for combustion.

Instead of all those tires filling up our landfills and dumps, those tires can be filled with compressed earth, made in to bricks, and used to build houses. Naturally insulated houses, with thick walls. And did I mention it was CHEAP? Really. Packed earth in to couple thousand tires, arrange them in to the proper pattern, stack them so you have walls, cover them in recycled wire mesh, and hose them down with adobe or concrete. Walls that are several feet thick, in a home deeply sunk in to the earth for stable temps. You don't need air conditioning. Most people will not need heat either. The stable earth temp as well as the cistern where blackwater and household waste decomps (which generates a LOT of heat passively) will keep the inside of the house at a stable temp of 55 to 65 degrees or so.

Earthships and dome homes are not the perfect answer either, but they are a start. Efficient use of living space to create more than you consume. Really, it is a very simple concept. Even on an acre lot, you can build an earthship type home, house a family there, and create more than you consume. But it requires work, sacrifice, hard work, and dedication. (And more work)

In France, they want to go one step farther than a subdivision of earthships, I was reading in a magazine about this plan to make an entire town of earthships... For both living and working. Biofactories and what not. The idea, as it currently exists on paper, is to create everything that the people of that town need right there in town, within reason. Fuel for the cars will be manufactured on site. Clothing will be made from animal and vegetable fibres. (Hemp maybe? ) All of the food will be grown and processed locally. They want to build a model town that is capable of near sustainability. Some goods, like computers, electronics, cars, stuff like that, of course you will need things like that. But day to day living stuff, it is entirely possible to do that locally.

This kind of bio-economy would also be more humane... Disabled people and people on well, no nice way to say this, but people existing in the perpetual welfare states, it would be economically viable for the government to give them an earthship or some kind of bio-home, so they too, can create more than they consume. The homes would be made out of entirely recycled goods, be dirt cheap to build, and would return a huge amount of resources for the time invested in their creation. Food, fuel, electricity, resources... It would give those folks a chance to actually do something with their lives... They would have the means to be productive members of society and return something. They could be care takers of their little sustainable plots... Which would sure beat living off the government teat and watching tv all day. Hunger could be wiped out... Social programs like foodstamps wouldn't be needed. Sure, these people would have to learn how to live on fresh fruits and veggies, instead of the preprocessed crap most folks buy, but that would be good for them. It would improve their general health, decreasing their medical costs, which are paid for by the welfare system. Heck, I dare say it would be economically viable for the government to pay people to stay at home and be full time caretakers over highly productive plots. Locally grown food means lower costs, and less fuel burned in transport. We have acres and acres of currently empty roofs on ineffecient homes, all that wasted space... Replace that with sustainable bio-friendly housing over time with a dedication to change, and all that wasted space could be put to better use. We could actually wage war on poverty and take back a lot of ground.

Heck, if we really wanted to stick to combustion for power purposes, instead of endless solar panels on the roofs of every home, how about gardens... Gardens filled with things like hemp. Things grown that could easily make bio-fuels. There are ways to deal with the problems we have now, it just takes some vision and creative thinking at a scale most people can't deal with.

:D

And serious Pete, relax. You'll live longer.

[Munkay]

We still like to tease him about it these days. Perhaps he had american blood in his veins:)

I don't know what you're talking about :whistling:

Cheers,

Munk

PS. Having reread my post, I apologize for lumping you into the group of 'one size fits all'.

[Munkay]

and I'm sorry. Just do the math.

Oh, I agree about the problems with solar panels right now. I wasn't actually referring to solar energy, at least not in the way it's typically thought of. I saw a special on TV last week (I apologize, it was late and the details are a bit fuzzy) where somewhere in Europe (Spain was it?) they built a large array of mirrors to reflect the sunlight onto one focal point at the top of a large tower. If I recall correctly it was the direct heat used to boil water into steam, producing energy via a turbine. It's possible it was solar panels, but I doubt it.

Cheers,

Munk

PS. Now that I'm not a student and don't have papers to do, I end up reading/watching tid bits of information. On NASA TV they were talking about advances in Solar Panels. That the ones used on Spirit and Sojourner were 30-40% efficient, which was a large contributing factor to their longer-than-expected use. Beyond that I'm afraid I don't know much. And I certainly know you have a stronger chemical/physics background for understanding the actual workings than I do. So take it as you may.

[kandrathe]

Oh, I agree about the problems with solar panels right now. I wasn't actually referring to solar energy, at least not in the way it's typically thought of. I saw a special on TV last week (I apologize, it was late and the details are a bit fuzzy) where somewhere in Europe (Spain was it?) they built a large array of mirrors to reflect the sunlight onto one focal point at the top of a large tower. If I recall correctly it was the direct heat used to boil water into steam, producing energy via a turbine. It's possible it was solar panels, but I doubt it.

Cheers,

Munk

PS. Now that I'm not a student and don't have papers to do, I end up reading/watching tid bits of information. On NASA TV they were talking about advances in Solar Panels. That the ones used on Spirit and Sojourner were 30-40% efficient, which was a large contributing factor to their longer-than-expected use. Beyond that I'm afraid I don't know much. And I certainly know you have a stronger chemical/physics background for understanding the actual workings than I do. So take it as you may.

There are solar systems using large parabolic mirrors to focus solar power to melt salt. You might be talking about Solar Tres. I looked up the efficiency of Solar Tres design. It is 18%. Mind you, this is all experimental as they don't know how this plant would operate over time (Solar One and Solar Two only operated for 3 years). The total reflective area will be 240,000 m² (60 acres of glass with an unknown area of buffer, storage and plant space) and it will produce 15MW (15/60 = 4MW(min) / acre for this design). My calculations would be then that in a very sunny place, like California, this plant would produce about 28,000 MWh per year (467 MWh / acre). A larger storage tank will be used giving the plant the ability to store 600 MWh, allowing the plant to run continuously during the summer (if the salt drops below a threshold temp they would burn fossil fuels to heat it). This solution might be good for a small town in the desert SW or even rural south of the USA with a population less than 2000 people, or up to 4000 homes if they had no industry. So minimally counting the cost of the heliostats, and building the operating plant it would cost about 120 million dollars. The startup cost per household would be about $30,000. Operating and maintenance? Who knows? My spot check on plant costs per MW is about $1.5 million, so it appears that Solar Tres will be about 5x the norm in plant costs, but thankfully, the fuel will be cheaper. The clincher for a Solar Tres, as in previous solar plants, will be in its maintenance and operational costs.

For comparison, some stats I found for Los Angeles proper shows they use 2500MW or 22 million MWh a year for 1.4 million consumers (2kW or 15 MWh / person / year which counts residential, business and industry). Extend that to the 5 county LA area with 20.6 million people. Let's see how many acres of land they would need for the power consumption of just the 5 county LA region, shall we? Oh... About 691570 acres, or 1,080 sq. mi. For comparison, the State of New Hampshire is 8,968 sq. mi., and Yellowstone National Park is 3,472 sq. mi. It would cost the 5 county LA area at least 65 to 80 billion dollars to build it (2x the normal rate).

Summary: Solar power still falls on the Earth at 1000 W/m2. If you have a huge 100 m2 reflector beaming it into the size of a postage stamp the postage stamp is getting 1Kw of energy when the sun is out. There are 8760 hours in one year, so a solar plant at 100% solar efficiency is going to get a fraction of that even in a very sunny place due to the available sunshine. LA gets 1861.5 hours of sunshine per year on average (less smog). Hence, 240000 m² of reflecting area results in 240MW(potential)/15MW(actual) = 6.5% of the suns potential energy is converted to power.

P.S. My investigation shows that Sojourners solar panels averaged 15% efficiency.
P.P.S I found the actual estimate for Solar Tres plant costs from MIT. $7500/KW, so actually 5x the norm.

[Occhidiangela]

will keep the inside of the house at a stable temp of 55 to 65 degrees or so.

That would see my wife bid me goodbye.

As for Pete relaxing for long life, I get the sense that fighting also keeps you alive. A few years back, on RB IIRC, he pointed out that he has a nice scar from a card carrying communist who arrived for hand to hand fighting. Relaxing would have cost Pete his life. So too other life threatening challenges.

Occhi

[Doc]

That would see my wife bid me goodbye.

As for Pete relaxing for long life, I get the sense that fighting also keeps you alive. A few years back, on RB IIRC, he pointed out that he has a nice scar from a card carrying communist who arrived for hand to hand fighting. Relaxing would have cost Pete his life. So too other life threatening challenges.

Occhi

Those temps are based on no heat at all. That is your base stable temp level year round. You can raise those temps by opening the blinds and allowing the sun in to heat the tile floors, wood burning stoves, etc. It is possible to raise the temp, but the temp will never be lower than that.

http://www.earthship.net/

All I can say is, spend some time there reading and watching the slide show. People are doing amazing things with biotecture. People get the mistaken idea that all earthships are in the desert, which is not true. Those tend to be the best and most extreme examples though. People have built functioning earthships above the arctic circle, all over Europe and Asia, in deserts, in jungles, on the frozen tundra.

And for some reason, a lot of people seem to think that the base stable temp is something they have to live with... This is a common misconception. It is easy to make it warmer. Just open the blinds, and let the sun sink in to the thermal banks. The base temp is very important though. This means that the structure could survive at below zero outside temps and should never get colder than the base temp for the building, since most of it is below ground at stable earth temps, the thermal banks from sunlight, the decomp from waste, etc. Note that all of these are passive means of maintaining stable temps. There are more agressive ways of raising the temp, like a small woodburning stove can quickly turn most earthships in to ovens.

People are still improving the science for these every day, and they have come a long way since the 70s, when earthships were damp muddy holes in the ground. All that moisture? Taken care of by an abundance of plants, most of which are used to produce food. Cisterns have improved dramatically, which means no more septic tank smell from the waste cistern. Also, some egghead figured out a way to use passive solar energy to boil down human sewage in the cistern, which in turn heats your home. All that decomp really puts off a lot of heat. Somebody right now is looking at a way of effectively trapping the gas produced from the soft matter decomp waste cistern, since it is methane rich, collecting it, storing it, and using it to perhaps power something like a genny. Graywater can be passively filtered though various things like limestone or sand, and the resulting water is safe to use for plants or other applications.

The earthships above the arctic circle are the most interesting though because of the unusual sun situation. Long periods of darkness. Even in sunless periods, they do amazingly well and maintain a comfortable livable temp for the occupants. Some guy is trying to build an earthship science station down in Antarctica.

The more people that start living this way the better. The science behind them will keep improving. Already there have been improvements in the past 5 or 6 six years that are huge leaps and bounds.

Some egghead is looking in to something called vegetable based batteries, where the food grown would be used to generate electricity. I have no clue how that would work, but it sounds interesting. Ever seen a clock that runs on a potato?

[Munkay]

This is what I get for being rusty with the sciences. Thanks for looking up the numbers Kandrathe, I do genuinely appreciate it.

After a little bit of Google-fu, I managed to find the mirror based powerplant I was referring to. It is indeed located in Spain, in Seville to be precise. The BBC has an article about it, which can be found here.

It's a very similar concept as the Solar Tres project, focus the energy onto one point raising the temperature, insert water (or saline solution) to get steam and voila, get some energy. According to their math, once completed it'll produce energy around 3 times more than the cost of coal power. Definitely not an overall solution, but definitely something that could help suppliment the power grid, assuming costs of productiong/upkeep aren't too high.

Cheers,

Munk

[kandrathe]

Some egghead is looking in to something called vegetable based batteries, where the food grown would be used to generate electricity. I have no clue how that would work, but it sounds interesting. Ever seen a clock that runs on a potato?

I heard that the price of corn is so high now that Mexicans can't afford tortillas. Thanks to ethanol of course. For every silver lining, there seems to be a cloud. Now... Make the vegetable Brussels sprouts or rutabagas and I won't complain. Who would want to eat them anyway?

[Hammerskjold]

I heard that the price of corn is so high now that Mexicans can't afford tortillas. Thanks to ethanol of course. For every silver lining, there seems to be a cloud. Now... Make the vegetable Brussels sprouts or rutabagas and I won't complain. Who would want to eat them anyway?

Yep. Though the last time I facetiously suggested someone invent a car that will run on hobos, therefore eliminating 2 problems with one solution, some people didn't quite get my attempt at humour. Or maybe my attempt just failed. Maybe I should've just said I want a car that not only uses green fuels, but uses soylent green fuels.

But I have read an article a few months back about some projects that wants to harvest methane from rotting yams, so there's no conflict of what goes for feed vs fuel.

Though lately I've been swayed more towards not only renewable energy, but renewable and clean burning energy. And for the most part that would point towards electric vehicles, since I don't see much interest or will for a Mr.Fusion powered sedan as of now.

But even for an electric vehicle, something like this link

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/30/be...g-peak-lithium/

also makes me think that the time is ripe for a great change, but I want to see a change that is not only good ecologically speaking, but also economically and politically speaking. (To be blunt, I want to see the decision being made as if we're building a cathedral, not a weekend church bake sale.)


I for one would love to have an electric car (a real offroad capable electric jeep would actually be cool) that is simpler to repair and maintain, have as few moving parts as possible, can be recharged at home or various other methods, and available in different configurations and not conceived as some sort of delusional concept car, ie: a glorified golf cart that designers mistakenly think would appeal to granola eating birkenstock wearers.

And priced to move for your average folks, not just for celebrities.

[eppie]

and I'm sorry. Just do the math. Sunlight is a very dilute form of energy, about 1000 W/m2 so if this is incident on a solar panel of 10% efficiency then only 100W is produced per square meter of panel. Calculate just what you would use, and then the cost of the contraption to capture and store the energy to be available when you need it.

Solar Power has been a boondoggle trumpeted by the technically illiterate for over 30 years as the savior of our energy woes. The only boon in Solar Power has been for those people who have been feeding at the government trough of grants, rebates, and salaries. Solar power is too dilute to be practical in solving any major energy need. This is why you don't see a rush to cover the deserts of the USA with solar panels. As for home use, again, the energy and material costs to produce the panels are too expensive compared to buying electricity from a power plant. Those consumers gullible enough to put a $12,000 to $20,000 unit on their roofs (with the 20 year payback if the units are 100% reliable) have hardly been so impressed as to herald them as the solution for the rest of us.

Sources of Electric Power

So, the power plants will continue to burn fossil fuels filling the atmosphere with those unwanted green house gases. The supposed "Greens" will continue point at the unfounded fantasy of cheap, abundant, clean, solar power and other solar related "soft energies" as the prim rosed trail.

First as you read, I said that according to me alternative energy sources will never give us enough energy if we don't change ourt lifestile....the same as also oil will not do.

But I don't agree with your words on solar energy panels. I know about quite a lot of research that is done on the cell using titaniumdioxide for example. These things can be used already, they are in the perfectioning phase now. Although not giving the same yield as silicon based solar cells these things are much much cheaper. And because thin layers of TiO2 are transparent you can build these things even in windows. In the future (I'm sure about this) everybody will cover his house in these things (windows, walls, roof etc.). Try googling e.g. the "gratzel cell" for more info. There is so much research done on these things nowadays that big scale commercialization will be just a matter of time.

[kandrathe]

First as you read, I said that according to me alternative energy sources will never give us enough energy if we don't change ourt lifestile....the same as also oil will not do.

But I don't agree with your words on solar energy panels. I know about quite a lot of research that is done on the cell using titaniumdioxide for example. These things can be used already, they are in the perfectioning phase now. Although not giving the same yield as silicon based solar cells these things are much much cheaper. And because thin layers of TiO2 are transparent you can build these things even in windows. In the future (I'm sure about this) everybody will cover his house in these things (windows, walls, roof etc.). Try googling e.g. the "gratzel cell" for more info. There is so much research done on these things nowadays that big scale commercialization will be just a matter of time.

Still eppie. 1kW/m2 at 100% efficiency in full equatorial sunlight. How many m2 of area would you need for what you consume? What will it cost? What is your monthly energy bill? For my household of 4 it is $200 and we have a fully electric house.

Let's say you are like the average Italian who uses 6000 kWh/year. Pick an efficiency number... For fun lets choose the theoretical achievable 40% (the inverse = 2.5). Assume Italy is like LA (which I doubt since it seems to be rainy at times) and gets about 1860 hours of sun per year. 6000/1860*2.5 = 8 kW avg need. So double it for peak need, and choose a storage mechanism like a huge bank of lead acid batteries. So you, and each Italian around you will need to buy and maintain solar panels between 8 to 16 m2, and the ability to store the excess for night time, winter time, and rainy times. Just the generation portion of the systems here in the USA cost about $9 per watt installed. Your average Italian will need to come up with $70,000 for the initial system, then invest more time and money each year for operation and maintenance. Now, will this system last 10 years ($600+M&O/month)? 20 years ($300+M&O/month)? And what was the energy consumed in making your system?

[eppie]

Still eppie. 1kW/m2 at 100% efficiency in full equatorial sunlight. How many m2 of area would you need for what you consume? What will it cost? What is your monthly energy bill? For my household of 4 it is $200 and we have a fully electric house.

Let's say you are like the average Italian who uses 6000 kWh/year. Pick an efficiency number... For fun lets choose the theoretical achievable 40% (the inverse = 2.5). Assume Italy is like LA (which I doubt since it seems to be rainy at times) and gets about 1860 hours of sun per year. 6000/1860*2.5 = 8 kW avg need. So double it for peak need, and choose a storage mechanism like a huge bank of lead acid batteries. So you, and each Italian around you will need to buy and maintain solar panels between 8 to 16 m2, and the ability to store the excess for night time, winter time, and rainy times. Just the generation portion of the systems here in the USA cost about $9 per watt installed. Your average Italian will need to come up with $70,000 for the initial system, then invest more time and money each year for operation and maintenance. Now, will this system last 10 years ($600+M&O/month)? 20 years ($300+M&O/month)? And what was the energy consumed in making your system?

Again, we will have to alter our lifestyle for sure......we can't continue using the same amount of energy as we do now.....so we don"t need to produce as much as we do now (with we I mean an average european of american because the world energy need will increase).
The solar cells I am talking about will cost around 5 times less, and are using a very small amount of raw material. Despite being less efficient they harvest light in a longer period of the day (harvesting is very efficient, charge transport a bit less) the calculation will be quite different anyway. Once these things have a lifetime of 20 years they will be a very good alternative for the energy we will need.
Especially because in 20 years your electricity bill will probably be also 5 times as high as it is now.

[Munkay]

Though lately I've been swayed more towards not only renewable energy, but renewable and clean burning energy. And for the most part that would point towards electric vehicles

On one hand, I agree with the sentiment. I'd love to see some cleaner burning, renewable energy sources become an affordable reality.

But on the other hand, there's a number of caveat's about electric cars. First off, there's the battery issue. Batteries aren't cheap, and have a limited life span on them. Until the costs come down an affordable electric car won't be a reality. Also, batteries are nasty on the environment if they are allowed to leak. Battery recycling programs (of which there are already many in existence) would curb this problem. But I'm not sure what happens when people start abandoning old cars, or crash on the highway and leak battery acid everywhere. By no means am I trying to be hyperbolic - it certainly isn't the end of the world if a battery leaks - but if we are talking about energies that lower the impact on the environment, it's a worthy consideration.

Secondly, there's one big consideration most people don't seem to talk about when you mention electric cars. Where is the energy coming from? Hybrids currently get their electricity when the car brakes. But gas is burned in order to get the car moving in the first place. Moreover, if you plug it into your wall at home the energy is likely coming from a Coal, Oil, or Nuclear power plant. Until that infrastructure changes, electric cars might not be pumping out Carbon Dioxide on the highway, but they're increasing the electric demand and pumping out Carbon Dioxide or Nuclear waste at the plant.

I'm all for advancing electric car technology, but it's got a ways to go before it's a true step forward.

Cheers,

Munk

[Hammerskjold]

You'll get no disagreement from me, if you read my original posting. Especially the Lithium link and afterwards.

No offense, but the quote you used make it seems as if I said current EVs are a perfect solution that is ready now, which is not what I wrote at all. Let's not take my words out of context, I don't remember doing that to you so I'd appreciate the same courtesy extended back.

Maybe I didn't write it clearly, but the main reason I put up that lithium link was -NOT- to tout EVs as a perfect and ready for prime time solution. Let's get that clear here and now.

And things like hybrids, to tell you the truth I personally believe they're only a start at best, and a temporary short term solution at worst.

Which is why I did not mention hybrids specifically at all in the first place.

My family actually did looked at some hybrids and some EVs a year ago. And we decided that the technology, the infrastructure, and the dealership in where we are was simply not that serious and commited about it yet. (Actually for the very same reasons you mention, which is why I'm confused as to why we're 'arguing' if we're basically agreeing.)

Which is really a shame, since I -do- want to see an affordable, reliable and flexible EV platform that simply leapfrogs all this stop gap solutions.

Not because I'm sort of green worshipping hippie, but because I'm tired of oil changes and other things that's associated with an internal combustion engine.

That Zebra battery mentioned looks to be very promising, though I want to see more 'on the field' performance report on it.


ps. I don't really want to get into too much discussion about energy generation, because I think that is a subject big enough to warrant it's own thread. But I've wondered not so recently and I know this sounds somewhat outlandish at first. But considering someone put up a possibly 'shopped pic of people using the escalator to a gym. I think it's fair game.;)

Why not combine the two. This is not my own idea but I've been giving it some thoughts. There's all this ads for things like Bowflex and home gyms etc. Why not combine burning fat with storing energy? All those weights lifted and stairs mastered and cycle spinned, where does all those potential human locomotion goes? More often than not, nowhere! They're not truly harnessed at all!

I blame the Matrix movie for giving the scheme a bad name, but it doesn't have to be an image of a human hamster chained to a wheel overseen by cruel robot masters. Take away the cruel robot masters, and you get a positive image! Burn the fat, get healthier, and run your home's energy needs all at the same time.

Reduce your energy requirement from the grid, or for those more physically ambitious get off it completely. Not only are you more self reliant AND self empowered, you might even get some killer pipes and some killer abs with it.

It doesn't even have to be super high tech, actually it would be better if it's not high tech overload at all. I'm imagining something of an oversized gravity based system like grandfather clock mechanisms, adapted to a bowflex like gyms hooked to a battery system. It should be made to be scalable for both personal usage to bigger community based applications.

[Munkay]

You'll get no disagreement from me, if you read my original posting. Especially the Lithium link and afterwards.

No offense, but the quote you used make it seems as if I said current EVs are a perfect solution that is ready now, which is not what I wrote at all. Let's not take my words out of context, I don't remember doing that to you so I'd appreciate the same courtesy extended back.

Maybe I didn't write it clearly, but the main reason I put up that lithium link was -NOT- to tout EVs as a perfect and ready for prime time solution. Let's get that clear here and now.

Huh?

If I reply to your post it doesn't necessarily mean it's a counter argument to yours. You brought up electric cars, and I decided to elaborate my thoughts on it. No need to get your flame retardant undies on, there was no flaming intended :)

The internet is a funny thing, tone doesn't carry over in words. But human beings read with tone, even when its reading silently. I can't apologize for the post per se, rereading it I don't think there was anything wrong with my response. But I do extend an apology for the mix up over tone, I can see where you felt it might be a counter argument to you. Most definitely not my intention!

Why not combine the two.

It's not as outlandish as it seems. There have been plenty of people who use bicycles to generate electricity. There was a professor when I was a student that powered all the energy in his office with a solar panel and a bicycle hooked up to a generator.

In a sense, the human body does produce a lot of energy that could be harnessed for other uses. Working out being a prime example. It's not unlike the idea behind modern hybrids, harnessing the energy lost during braking.

Since we can't get around the laws of thermodynamics, using the body for the express purpose of energy doesn't make much sense. Even barring draconian images of men on monster hamster wheels, the increase in food demands would offset the use. But if we are doing the work for other reasons, such as fitness, why not try to tap into the extra energy a bit. I'm sure some big gyms could benefit from hooking up cardio equipment (treadmills, bikes, etc) to small generators and storing the energy to power lights etc.

Cheers,

Munk

[kandrathe]

Again, we will have to alter our lifestyle for sure...

You can start now. Try cutting your energy consumption by half. Try to use 1/2 your current electricity, 1/2 your current heating bill and 1/2 your current fossil fuels in your autos. Let me know how you do.

Abundant and cheap energy translates into a quality of life. Someone is trying to convince us that the answer lies in trading carbon credits. See, they will pick an average carbon foot print and if you use more than the average you will be taxed. If you use less in your squalid cave man existence, well at least you get the nice feeling that you are saving the planet. However... It is all bunk. This is just another tax scheme to redistribute wealth, where the rich will willingly fly their jets, and build their mansions, while the middle class and working poor will bear the burdens. This is just bloody global socialism where productivity is translated into carbon credits. Of course, northern climates will also suffer worse than equatorial ones. This might be one reason why the highest kW/person consumption rate in the world is in Canada. Just like income, energy consumption has a high correlation to personal productivity.

The entire planet votes with their wallets daily. I don't see the demand for any energy decreasing anywhere. Do you? Maybe that eco-warrior Mr. Gore? Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth” I guess not.

Doc's work on sustainable living is admirable, and a model for anyone with his spare time, some land with streams on it, and fainting goats for fertilizer. Mr. Gore, on the other hand is a fear mongering hypocrite.

[kandrathe]

Since we can't get around the laws of thermodynamics, using the body for the express purpose of energy doesn't make much sense. Even barring draconian images of men on monster hamster wheels, the increase in food demands would offset the use. But if we are doing the work for other reasons, such as fitness, why not try to tap into the extra energy a bit. I'm sure some big gyms could benefit from hooking up cardio equipment (treadmills, bikes, etc) to small generators and storing the energy to power lights etc.

I am very green. I use slave Munkays to power my huge hamster wheel.

[Munkay]

I am very green. I use slave Munkays to power my huge hamster wheel.

:blink:

[Doc]

Doc's work on sustainable living is admirable, and a model for anyone with his spare time, some land with streams on it, and fainting goats for fertilizer. Mr. Gore, on the other hand is a fear mongering hypocrite.

I am seriously pondering if I can use goat pellets as fuel somehow. I am sure it can be done, and while I don't have the brain power to harness it somehow my self, I might go goat roping somebody in to figuring out a solution to goat scat power. It is great for growing stuff in the garden, but I do wonder if I could be doing more with it. See, I can't bring my self to eat the goats. So there are a hell of a lot of goats around here. And goat gobbies are a plentiful and abundant resource around here. Easily harvestable too. Most of the little bleating bastards wont pinch a loaf outside... No. They wait till night when they are in the barn. And drop a duce indoors. Miserable little ingrates. I have to hose down their all night poop party in the morning and blow all of the hay and goat nuggets out the poop chute in the back of the barn. Then, everything just sort of sits in the compost heap that is back there just outside the poop chute.