"B) I concur w/ Robert Z, wind/solar can't handle the load until some great extraordinary development in battery technology comes along. "
Not so fast.....concentrating solar thermal breaks that misconceived limitation of solar. The sun heats up a reservoir of working fluid. The hot working fluid runs a steam generator turbine just like a combustion based power plant. In many cases the power plants connected to solar thermal arrays are regular power plants that had run on combustion. Those power plants run 24/7, even though the sun is only up 10 hours a day. We need a lot of those plants to make a big dent, but zero battery technology is needed to make that work. They are approaching the magical "dollar a watt" price point for that technology. When that happens, China tips to solar because then it's cheaper than building more coal plants, and then everything changes. On Jan 19, 7:52 pm, Leslie <leslie.bri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oi! Lots of thoughts.... > > A) I applaud anyone who can commute via their Rivendell. > Unfortunately for me, it's 40 mi from driveway to parking lot one > way... I just can't commute by bike. I do carpool; so, four of us > make the trip together, instead of each of us in four > automobiles. (And whilst the obvious reply might be to either > move to closer to work, or change to a job closer to home, neither of > those ideas work: I don't want to live near where I work, and there's > not as good of a job near home. Maybe one day, but, not at this > time.) > > B) I concur w/ Robert Z, wind/solar can't handle the load until some > great extraordinary development in battery technology comes along. > However, I would like to make a comment along the lines of using the > non-renewable resources: petroleum has far greater uses than being > put into gas tanks, IMHO. Medicines that are petrochemical-based, > lubricants, etc. (bicycle tires!); it's a shame that so much is used > as fuel, instead of conserved for its other uses. Coal, is going to > remain the baseload power source for the forseeable future in this > country; half the electricity in the US is derived from such; unless > we give up big-screen TV's, air-conditioning, electric heat, ipods, > eliminate electric cars instead of having more of them, etc., the > demand for coal will only rise. Yes, nuclear would be the only real > alternative to coal for electricity, but politics will have to shift > significantly first. Even if all electricity was produced through > methods other than coal, though, coal would still be in demand for > steel production (converted into coke), as chemical basestocks (the > same way petrochemicals are), etc. (Disclosure: I'm a coal > reclamation geologist, FWIW...) > > Think of it this way: our steel Rivendells: steel is an alloy of iron > and carbon, the carbon is from coke, which is produced from coal. > Without coal, we wouldn't have our Rivendells... > > C) I encourage recycling; we need less going into landfills. But > even if you recycle nothing else, recycle aluminum (cans, non- > Rivendell bicycles, Land Rovers, etc). The amount of electricity > needed in the electrolysis process to convert bauxite into metallic > aluminum is immense; so much electricity is saved simply by keeping > the aluminum already made in the loop. > > D) Hope this doesn't step on toes, come across as preachy, etc. Not > intended to; I realize internet musings often don't convey the visual/ > audible nuances that we intend to be inferred.... > > -L -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
