SVT450R Posted September 4, 2012 Author Share Posted September 4, 2012 Bump so quiet in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 ^waiting on the PTC extension like everyone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 While that is certainly good news, to bad it has not made much of an impact to this: Good thing CO2 doesn't seem to matter much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I'd suggest that if we try to reduce the sunlight hitting the ground that would slow down photosynthesis for plant growth and evaporation that drives the water cycle. Perhaps undesirable side effects? Also aesthetically it's nicer to look at clearer skies... Was there a noticeable reduction in plant growth from 1940-1980? Or did that not happen, which is it? More then likely the 1940-1980's was natural variability and further illustrates a disconnect from CO2 predictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vandy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Was there a noticeable reduction in plant growth from 1940-1980? Or did that not happen, which is it? More then likely the 1940-1980's was natural variability and further illustrates a disconnect from CO2 predictions. What does 1940-1980, and natural variability for that matter, have to do with particulate matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Was there a noticeable reduction in plant growth from 1940-1980? Or did that not happen, which is it? More then likely the 1940-1980's was natural variability and further illustrates a disconnect from CO2 predictions. Variations in the output of soot from coal plants etc. is natural? Only to the degree that pollution legislation was affected by "natural" protesters Maybe on Earth Day................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted September 9, 2012 Author Share Posted September 9, 2012 Here is a map of state renewable energy goals for those that may not have been aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salbers Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 One might keep an eye on the Energy Catalyzer with third party testing results released in the past day: http://www.scribd.com/doc/105322688/Penon4-1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salbers Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I think technologies for renewable energies has increased tremendously. Pretty exciting to see new ideas being spread about. I do however think that there is not a technology that can match coal at the moment. I'm not saying to stop production on the technology we have at the moment. i'm just saying we can not cut coal and oil out totally just yet. coal and oil is our bridge to a future technology that will be sustainable. I for one can not wait until we solve our energy problem. Natural gas is displacing coal in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salbers Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Was there a noticeable reduction in plant growth from 1940-1980? Or did that not happen, which is it? More then likely the 1940-1980's was natural variability and further illustrates a disconnect from CO2 predictions. I wasn't talking about changes in plant growth in relation to CO2 levels. I was referring to what happens if you reduce sunlight with orbiting mirrors or the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbutts Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Whereas the right side is full of COIs, the other side of the aisle is hardly unified either. There are major disagreements among self-identified environmentalists that cause stand-stills on local level initiatives. I've watched endless debates on the merits of hydro and wind. Tear down the dam, it prevents salmon from spawning and warms the water... Don't tear down the dam, generations of turtles, beavers, etc. will lose their habitat.... Wind turbines are clean and renewable sources of power... Wind turbines kill eagles and bats, cause horrific noise pollution, and disturb local climate.... Not to mention that NIMBYism seems especially prevalent on the left. This area is about as liberal as it gets and we can't even get a solar panel installation on a landfill because it disturbs the view. If you think you could get a wind turbine up anywhere near here you're crazy. (fortunately there's no wind so it hasn't been broached) And we all know who the primary opponents of the Cape Wind project were, and why. In the end, for all the rhetoric the spectre of reduced property values tends to change stories. There appears to be some action at Mt. Tom which is pretty close.. I believe the entire Holyoke Range would be suitable for wind power generation. This editorial "Wind turbines, migrating raptors don't mix" pretty much confirms what you were saying though. Wind turbines can provide an excellent source of renewable energy and their placement should be pursued where appropriate. However, Mount Tom is not an appropriate site. Scientists have recently told us that the Mount Tom ridgeline produces the best wind in our region; the migrating hawks have known this for centuries.Wind turbine blades and large numbers of migrating raptors are not compatible. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Natural gas is displacing coal in the U.S. You got that right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 There appears to be some action at Mt. Tom which is pretty close.. I believe the entire Holyoke Range would be suitable for wind power generation. This editorial "Wind turbines, migrating raptors don't mix" pretty much confirms what you were saying though. Wind projects in NH WILL continue to be built. Power prices in the NE will ensure that and the wind is certainly good. As for raptors, the issues with migrating raptors in the east aren't nearly as big as in the west. The big issues these days in the east from a species standpoint is the sread of white nose syndrome and its effects on many species of bats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Wind projects in NH WILL continue to be built. Power prices in the NE will ensure that and the wind is certainly good. As for raptors, the issues with migrating raptors in the east aren't nearly as big as in the west. The big issues these days in the east from a species standpoint is the sread of white nose syndrome and its effects on many species of bats. It's always something eh.... Sounds like a few dead bats might have to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I've probably pounded this subject to death on this forum, but it warrants continued hammering. Every energy source must be reconciled with its inputs and analyzed thermodynamically. With (most) oil, coal and natural gas, this is easy: The outputs far exceed the total input energy. With renewables and increasingly so with unconventional fossil fuels, the energy in/energy out ratios are much smaller. A certain amount of that energy output must be then reinvested back into the energy sector and enough must be left over to operate society. How much? Well, that's the subject of much debate, but almost all estimates lie above 5:1 and most above 10:1. Anything less than the critical threshold acts as a "leech" on the system and slows it down via entropic processes. In other words, you can't run the world as we know it on oil sands. As for the fusion article. Great, how long has it been 30-50 years away? Getting a stable, usable and persistent fusion reaction has been way more difficult than we ever imagined. Trying to imitate stable conditions that occur in the center of stars with pressures on the order of gigabars and temperatures in the millions Kelvin isn't just hard, it's ridiculously difficult on Earth. Entropy does not care about our aspirations. I've yet to see a single solution that can pull even a significant amount of the weight. It's going to take multitudes of integrated renewable sources with way more funding than we have physical, political and social means to do currently. We'd better hope for a monumental breakthrough. Edit: For salbers on the thorium thing since it seems more viable to me than fusion: http://www.torium.se/res/Documents/124670.pdf Great paper there from the guys at ORNL about the tech gaps that remain. We're a ways off from LTFRs becoming viable, much less economically viable (costs remain very high). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PottercountyWXobserver Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 I thought this was a neat idea, but is it pratical?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryM Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Calgary has a viable, & popular light rail system that's totally solar powered. Too little too late, but proof of principle, Terry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Calgary has a viable, & popular light rail system that's totally solar powered. Too little too late, but proof of principle, Terry Too late? What are you talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryM Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Too late? What are you talking about. When do you think that Detroit will design and build a heavily subsidized light rail system to provide the populace with carbon neutral transportation? Terry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 When do you think that Detroit will design and build a heavily subsidized light rail system to provide the populace with carbon neutral transportation? Terry After the Revolution, we will ALL like strawberries! Seriously, Terry, here I side with Jonger It's never too late to try and fix this, simply because it's too important to give up on. I didn't know that the Calgary light rail system was solar powered - I find that comforting also, and I'm a card carrying Alarmist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Bump for a solution to the problem of SLR that does not require us to stop all the melting - either by reducing GHG or by parking giant mirrors in space. That's a good thing, since the above increasingly looks like not happening. So....if you can't beat'em, join em....especially if you are one of the first places slated to go under. http://phys.org/news/2012-08-maldives-island-masterplan.html I actually think that this might be one of the solution types that actually happens in the event Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PottercountyWXobserver Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 http://www.ecotechinstitute.com/ecotech-videos.cfm Is this place any good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 http://www.ecotechin...tech-videos.cfm Is this place any good? At least the local weather would be more interesting then Houston. Looks interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted September 28, 2012 Author Share Posted September 28, 2012 Solar May Produce Most of World’s Power by 2060, IEA Says http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-29/solar-may-produce-most-of-world-s-power-by-2060-iea-says.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radarman Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 There appears to be some action at Mt. Tom which is pretty close.. I believe the entire Holyoke Range would be suitable for wind power generation. This editorial "Wind turbines, migrating raptors don't mix" pretty much confirms what you were saying though. Just saw this... While I'm skeptical about the "quality" of the wind on Mt. Tom at all, this project was nixed for an entirely different reason: FAA determined that a turbine here would disturb air traffic at Bradley and Westover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 Jonger posted a link to this in another thread i am actually impressed with what they are doing here. http://www.betterplace.com/How-it-Works/index Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Jonger posted a link to this in another thread i am actually impressed with what they are doing here. http://www.betterpla...-it-Works/index I actually had this idea recently and found out it was a reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share Posted October 1, 2012 I actually had this idea recently and found out it was a reality. It's a very good idea and fixes one of the biggest problems with an electric vehicle traveling distances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PottercountyWXobserver Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.