Popular Science solves energy problems, USA exports oil?

Originally posted by whatukno
If I recall correctly Steam driven cars were pretty clean themselves. They ran on kerosine to heat the water. The Stanley Steamer (the car not the carpet company) could do about 130 miles an hour. I bet if we reviseted this consept we might find our answer is in the old steam engine with hydrogen fuel cells. the exhaust could suplement the boiler.

I know archaic but thats me

Hrmm... I'd worry about potential impacts of that much steam polution. Think about... with the number of cars on the road these days, if they were all to produce steam it could impact local humidity. Instead of smog, you'd end up with fog. Real fog! And rain... and mildew... and thermal disruptions to weather patterns... ya see where I'm going?

My point is that anyone technology can look good, but if you look at it hard you'll see it's downside.

Same goes for hybrids.
There's several obsicals in this technology's path towards "solving everything".

First, there's popular adoption. You need the masses to pick up the technology and run with it. The people have to make it their standard. This can happen quite quickly (Cellphones as a case in point), but only in the right circumstances. There must be clear benifet to the consumer. The new technology must be clearly better before they'll abandon what they have. The cost must be comprable. Plasma/LCD TVs did not start to replace existing CathodeRay based sets until their cost came down to a compairable level (still a little high... thus I don't have one yet).

IF costs can be dropped to the point where a new/firsttime car buyer can consider buying a hybrid AND the hybrids preform as well as or better (as some reports have stated) than gas only cars, the market will naturally gravitate towards going hybrid.

Second, it doesn't end Peak Oil... it delays it. Infact, it delays it less than you'd think.
Why?
Think about it. You plug these cars in to charge up on electricity. Where does that electricty come from? More than likely, it comes from a powerplant that is burning fossil fuels. Now you've put more of a load on those powerplants and what will they have to do? Burn more fuel. SO, by going to hybrid technology would only move the problem... it wouldn't lessen the demand for oil nearly as much as you first thought. Infact, it might even increace oil demand (depending on how efficent the plants are and what fuel they are burning).

SO... it's not a winning plan, UNLESS you look at overall power generation issues and commit to dealing with those as well. Nuclear Power is the only major source we know of that can provide for our demands while not increasing demand for oil.... but we ran away from it as an option. We need to think about returning to nuclear energy. Fortunatly, some folks are...

ITER
Check this out. This could become a HUGE shot in the arm for alternate power production. ITER is trying to beat the Fussion Barriar through good old fashioned size. It's BIG. The goal is to create the first ever exo-thermic fussion reaction.
(For those who don't know, fussion is way less radioactive than fission, which is our current standard nuclear power technology)
What this could mean is that we would have access to sustainable, renewable, non-poluting, and cheap power.

Suddenly, hybrids are not only practical, but they could well become inferrior to electric only cars!


So... with all of the above in mind, I propose to you that there will never be a single techonolgy that will ever solve everything, but combined technologies could. While we're waiting for ITER to come on-line, we should be working with what we have. Conventional nuclear power. Wind, wave, and sun. More efficent power storage devices. Hell, someone give John Hutchison a grant!!

Originally posted by ADHDsux4me
As much as all of this is a good idea, you know it won't happen at least in the next 25 years.

Why? Why give up because it's so hard?

The status quo will be maintained as long as Oil Lobbyists, and Big- Oil Republicans remain alive and in office. Maintaining the status quo, is all that concerns them.

Actually they are not simply attempting to keep things as they are but actively trying to subvert and destroy the achievements and progress that our forefathers managed despite far greater odds against them.

Notice instead of embracing new ideas the Gubment, made a paltry gesture to learn new fuel alternatives, for our addiction to foreign oil. Hmm Mr. Bush, don't you think you and your family has helped that Oil along a little?"

Any and all money that goes towards alternatives are just blatent theft as they have been aware of far far cheaper alternatives for a hundred years or more.

Love yer Jesus, Love yer Rifle, Love yer Gas-Guzzlin SUV, as long as "I'm" making money on oil.

Well i am all for people being allowed to love those things as they are not the problem with the world today.

The rich get richer, stay rich, and the poor are all obviously tree-hugging, green tie dyed flag waving beatnick hippies, with upstart wacko ideas which will shake-the big oil money, right off the tree.

Let all the anger out! The reason people come up with these strange ideas about the world is IMO because they are trying to deal with the contradiction that is this reality we are being educated and propagandized to believe in. IMO people are doing pretty well considering what they are forced to deal with on a daily basis.

(addendum) I have nothing against Christians, Nor Tree Hugging Hippies, lol.

I felt ranty...

-ADHD

I used to take my frustration out on the nearest wall but it won so now i try resolve my anger in more productive manners.

Stellar

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Hrmm... I'd worry about potential impacts of that much steam polution. Think about... with the number of cars on the road these days, if they were all to produce steam it could impact local humidity. Instead of smog, you'd end up with fog. Real fog! And rain... and mildew... and thermal disruptions to weather patterns... ya see where I'm going?

Then use part of the energy generated to cool down the steam and store the water in tank that can be emptied at home. Don't be such a alarmist!

My point is that anyone technology can look good, but if you look at it hard you'll see it's downside.

If your a raging pessimist such is always a possibility.

Same goes for hybrids.
There's several obsicals in this technology's path towards "solving everything".

We already have free energy solutions that would solve 'all' our energy problems.

First, there's popular adoption. You need the masses to pick up the technology and run with it. The people have to make it their standard. This can happen quite quickly (Cellphones as a case in point), but only in the right circumstances.

Some good marketing and government complicity will help no end. The reasons cellphones caught on so fast is because they are ideal tracking units that governments all over the world want to get us used to. They do NOT want to get us used to abundant free energy so that's why you wont see alternative means of transportation making fast inroads in the public perception.

There must be clear benifet to the consumer. The new technology must be clearly better before they'll abandon what they have.

Supply can create demand and it does not always have much to do with how useful the product is or if it actually benefits the consumer.

The cost must be comprable. Plasma/LCD TVs did not start to replace existing CathodeRay based sets until their cost came down to a compairable level (still a little high... thus I don't have one yet).

The cost wont be comparable unless the product actually reaches the market and after seeing what GM did to the Ev-1 it's pretty obvious that they are not going to make the same mistake twice. The next hybrid that comes from them will be REALLY inefficient.

IF costs can be dropped to the point where a new/firsttime car buyer can consider buying a hybrid AND the hybrids preform as well as or better (as some reports have stated) than gas only cars, the market will naturally gravitate towards going hybrid.

Well GM did not actually allow anyone to buy their first hybrid so how can one gauge market response? Fact is Hybrids will destroy the car industry as we know it today because they were simply too cheap to operate and likely will be so again despite best efforts to undermine the quality of the product with inferior batteries and other systems.

Second, it doesn't end Peak Oil... it delays it. Infact, it delays it less than you'd think.

Peak oil in the near term is a fantasy created from whole cloth and we will be very unlucky to see a oil in the ground shortage before the end of this century.

Why?
Think about it. You plug these cars in to charge up on electricity. Where does that electricty come from?

Where does it currently come from or where can it come from? All the electricity we use today already comes from the active vacuum and burning fossil fuels have not added a single watt to the power grid since day one. All generators have ever done is create a dipolarities ( and then promptly destroy them again) from which this free energy flows and all we should do is ask them to stop smashing these diploraties as fast as they are being created.

More than likely, it comes from a powerplant that is burning fossil fuels. Now you've put more of a load on those powerplants and what will they have to do? Burn more fuel.

Only under the current energy paradigm but it really has nothing to do with what is in reality possible and well understood for more than a hundred years.

SO, by going to hybrid technology would only move the problem... it wouldn't lessen the demand for oil nearly as much as you first thought. Infact, it might even increace oil demand (depending on how efficent the plants are and what fuel they are burning).

They use coal and the US coal reserves are enough many hundreds if not a thousand years. You can build coal fired electricity plants with very close to zero emissions as is now being done by China on large scale.

SO... it's not a winning plan, UNLESS you look at overall power generation issues and commit to dealing with those as well. Nuclear Power is the only major source we know of that can provide for our demands while not increasing demand for oil.... but we ran away from it as an option. We need to think about returning to nuclear energy. Fortunatly, some folks are...

Nuclear energy is probably the best conventional option but it's hardly close to the best option we know about and is still just another centralized system that can and will be abused to control the flow of energy.

ITER
Check this out. This could become a HUGE shot in the arm for alternate power production. ITER is trying to beat the Fussion Barriar through good old fashioned size. It's BIG. The goal is to create the first ever exo-thermic fussion reaction.

Why not Cold fusion devices that can be adapted for home use? We could probably easily each have our own little fusion 'plant' next to the kettle but such devices are probably going to allow people more freedom than is required to make them useful to their various governments.

(For those who don't know, fussion is way less radioactive than fission, which is our current standard nuclear power technology)
What this could mean is that we would have access to sustainable, renewable, non-poluting, and cheap power.

Also centralized and currently MASSIVELY expensive in terms of the energy ( non so far) it's contributed to the power grid.

Suddenly, hybrids are not only practical, but they could well become inferrior to electric only cars!

Electric cars are by no means inferior as the EV-1 proved with alarming clarify to one and all.

So... with all of the above in mind, I propose to you that there will never be a single techonolgy that will ever solve everything, but combined technologies could.

Well i think is rather well understood by most anyone who have been involved in the sciences?

While we're waiting for ITER to come on-line, we should be working with what we have. Conventional nuclear power. Wind, wave, and sun. More efficent power storage devices. Hell, someone give John Hutchison a grant!!

Maybe i have been overly harsh ( i read 80% before deciding to respond) but it's not my fault you leave a mention of the Hutchinson effect for the very last line! Next time i will finish reading the post and carefully consider if the last line in that post does as much to redeem earlier mistakes as it did here.

PLEASE do not help spread this peak oil lie as it gets harder and harder to assume that it's a honest mistake due to not being as informed as now so easily possible.

Stellar

great topic here, since no one has included a link to this article I will at this point.

www.reuters.com...

This article discusses PG&E's interest in setting up electric power stations for cars since it has plenty of spare energy outside of peak hours. I hope they start working on this ASAP!

It makes so much sense to use this excess unused power that we currently have to power our cars, everyone who hasn't seen the article should take a look.

So if we all buy whatever the hell these people are saving, we'll all be better off energy wise? Damn, never heard that before.