Coal gassification or pulverized coal? Neither! Fuel cell/turbine solar collector algae/biogas conversion instead.
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/10/pulverized_coal.html#comment-24408921
|
|||
|
Recent Comments
Month Archive
|
Thursday, October 26
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 26 Oct 2006 09:57 AM CDT
Coal gassification or pulverized coal? Neither! Fuel cell/turbine solar collector algae/biogas conversion instead. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/10/pulverized_coal.html#comment-24408921 Monday, October 9
by
amazngdrx
on Mon 09 Oct 2006 11:00 AM CDT
Power plant pollution, waste water, and algae all mixed up and pumped through solar collectors, can yield 4000 gallons of biodiesel per acre. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/10/vertigro_algae_.html#comment-23623140 In the case of solid oxide fuel cell/turbine generation that works with biogas from algae the whole system can wean itself from fossil fuels completely. Pulverized coal can be used as long as it is still needed, then biogas from digesting the half of the algae product not turned into biodiesel. As the area of solar collectors increases the biogas eventually replacing most fossil fuel use as this form of generation becomes mainly a backup for renewable electric grid power from wind, water, and solar. No more combustion, rather fuel cell catalytic conversion at high temperature. Distributed generation and storage backed up by these regional solar algae/biogas energized fuel cell/turbine power plants. These systems could be mounted on the present power plant buildings. And surrounding buildings. When the sun shines the waste water, algae, and CO 2/ NOx pumped through the tubes in the concentrating solar collectors. The heat byproduct would provide heating/cooling power for all the buildings the systems are mounted on. And as long as we're talking fuel for mainly cars, why not mount the remainder of systems needed over parking lots and highways. That way no more undeveloped land need be destroyed to provide this algae based biofuel. Branson ought to have backed these systems instead of ethanol. Gates screwed up and backed ethanol too. it's alarming. What we are talking about is an energy re-evolution. Power plants re-evolving into algae/solar power from fossil power, and from combustion to catalytic fuel cell direct electric generation. The coal feeding the fuel cells and CO 2 to the algae until a big enough collector area is built to replace the coal itself with biogas. And demand for the power plant going lower and lower as renewable sources come online. And when the increasing amount of biogas from the algae meets the decreasing backup power demand? Well then coal becomes an excelent emergency energy source, but is hardly ever needed. Another possible source of energy for this setup is algae filtered from fertlizer runnoff polluted rivers, lakes, and oceans. why mine coal? Filter algae instead. Friday, October 6
by
amazngdrx
on Fri 06 Oct 2006 10:30 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/10/biofuels_from_h.html#comment-23488923 Why no response from nuclear power advocates to a possible compromise to allow construction of newer, safer, waste eating nuclear power plants? Because they know that nuclear power could not compete on a subsidy free, level playing field with renewable power. Wednesday, October 4
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 04 Oct 2006 09:52 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/10/biofuels_from_h.html#comment-23375189 This message needs to be on every blog and every media outlet that it can get to. Disaster on every level from our present prevaling energy sources needs to be halted yesterday. Stop combustion and nuclear fission as energy sources now! Tuesday, October 3
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 03 Oct 2006 10:36 AM CDT
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/9/21/233944/840/#27 Time for a new religious institution? Based on the better aspects of other religions with the reverence of nature and it's conservation as the central tenant. The collection plate is the sale of wind power from systems installed on land put into conservation trust by the community. It could be a global community, with wealthier members donating time and money to bringing simple techology to those in less cash rich locales of spaceship earth. Spiritual tourism, as other religions build homes, clinics, and schools around the world, this community could spread it's renewably powered lifestyle in that helpful, peaceful mode. Meanwhile the capitalistic members would invest in businesses to manufacture and install these new techologies and produce organic food and renewable power to sell on their own for profit. It's a kind of socialist/religious base, owning the land and power generation wind systems on it, and members as the individual (and partnered) family farms and businesses. Land on the border and interior of conservation land could be sold or leased to members. Thursday, September 28
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 28 Sep 2006 11:05 AM CDT
What do progressives need in a great ultily grade local, state, and national political speech? Well we are always working on that here in blogland, wether we know it or not. Even our right winds fiends ...er friends, are helping the dialectic produce it. We merely need to glean. Glean the perfect speech from the "aether". Calling on the political muse. Jobs that last, good jobs, based on sustainable renewable energy and next generation techology like solar and wind power and electric plugin vehicles. Jobs in local economies, like farming, logging, manufacturing, recreation, real estate, construction.. that all rest on long term local economic health, instead of short term corporate destruction. Powerful interests corrupting local government and selling resources out cheap for temporay profits and temporay jobs. An affordable health insurance safety net preventing all these catastopic bankruptcies due to uninured medical disasters, very personal family disasters. Health insurance that lasts so older workers can get jobs, companies are freezing people likely to have uninsured heatlh problems out of hiring, right into financial trouble. Older baby boomers missing affordable health insurance are at the age where they tend to vote consistently. This issue is vital. My idea would be to lower the medicare age 2 years every year until everyone is covered. But means test medicare so those with over say 200,000 per year income do not get the benefits they don't need, they can afford their own insurance. Now to reframe all this into bumper sticker slogans! Hehehey. As the evil, sulfur fuming GOP political consultants say, "we have a bumpersticker, they have an essay." Their thinks tanks, Heritage foundation, Cato Institute, American enterprise Institure make up those bumperstickers, it's up to us progressive bloggers to get our bumpers stuck. Let's all challenge our favorite blogs to work this out, dialectically. Thursday, September 21
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 21 Sep 2006 12:44 PM CDT
As I've talked over the original duuhbya "trifecta", and his new "trifecta", http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/9/19/63034/8000/#5 may I now consider Hugo's "trifecta"? The "sulfur fumes" reference as in he could still smell them at the UN podium after duuhbya's (devilya's) visit. Satirizing the salem witch trial religious nut wing overtoned axis of evil pronouncements of the duuhbyaist regime. Satirizing the chimp himself directly. (Judge not, oh yee of shrub-like faithbasedness, hehey) And of course the oily sufurous fumes of the exxonmob/halliburton minions from hell follow this feller everywhere he goes. It's Hugo's trifecta joke that beats anything our lame chimp in chief could do, even with decent writers. Both of these torturing dictators run on oil of course. Who tortures and kills more people? Bush or chavez? That ought to be a topic at their separate but equal trials, that might be held were there actually justice on this planet. Post script! Hugo controls citgo through Venezualan ownership. What's next? China owning Walmart? Then who will buy exxonmob? Iran? Saudi Arabia? Putin's KGB oil mob? Just bidness as usual for the texas oil boy prez. Nero and bonnie prince duuhbya separated at birth? Hmmmm.
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 21 Sep 2006 11:49 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/prius_phev_will.html#comment-22722444 It looks like the first dawning of the technology to store renewable energy from wind, water, and solar power in the batteries of electric plugin cars plugged into the power grid. I mentioned this in another article here awhile back. http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/7/10/1012526.html 100s of millions of electric cars plugged in while sitting still (95% of a car's life is parked) at home, at work, at school or shopping. Storing power, days worth of power to even out solar and wind power peaks and valleys. Then one can charge the car full up in a few minutes when needed, either by programming the charger in the electric car, say for the time one leaves for work, or simply waiting 5 minutes to get it back to full charge anytime it is need for commuting. Car owners that plugin to help the grid smooth its peaks would be rewared with lower cost killowatts for their car and home. Depending upon how many storage killowatts their car provided to the grid. all simple with computerized electronic metering and billing. Actually this makes it worth having battery storage in one's home too. Storing power for the power company and reducing your energy costs. And it fits right in with home solar, wind, and even farm biogas fuel cell/microturbine electric power generation (75% efficiency electric power from cow poop!). The value of your killowatt hours gleaned from your own renewable energy system can be maximized by getting payed to help the power company smooth out peak demand and renwable energy supply. Wednesday, September 20
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 20 Sep 2006 07:22 AM CDT
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/19/science/19rive.html?incamp=article_popular Yep, these experts must have read my blog, hehey. http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/7/15/1032024.html My previous recomendation on global climate disaster enhanced flooding, hydroelectric power, and restoring depleted aquifers. Tuesday, September 19
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 19 Sep 2006 11:44 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/bush_to_reverse.html#comment-22578138 So what? Is he going to claim no one can figure out wether or not global climate change is from natural or human sources again?
That's my guess. He needs a get out of investing real money in renewables clause for his fossil fuelish corporate banking friends.
At some point one has to realize that the "toxic texan" is the source of his very bad public image around the world, not the vast majority of humanity on planet earth that sees this administration as dangerous and the president as a puppet of corporate oil interests.
Even the most powerful leader of the most powerful nation on planet earth has to at least notice public opinion.
When even people like Powell turn on his policies, it maybe time for even the most faithbased of patriots to rethink their point of view.
I think what is happening now is that even the corporate boardroomies at exxonmob, ford, and GM are starting to get nervous about a possible invasion of Iran.
The Iraq thing is just not delivering oil. Making it a complete failure in even the board roomate's eyes. And now oil prices are falling, killing the record oil industry profits.
Will they rise after the election? OPEC is going to cut production to make it happen. Then the roomies will be happy again and let Rummy invade Iran? Maybe so.
Gasoline at 4 bucks per gallon might sweeten the invasion prospects for them. And the budget busting profits for contractors like Halliburton and other defense contractors give the roomates a place for their hedge funds to invest.
Budget busting weakens federal power and strengthens the hand of capital. That is Reagan Revolution at it's most basic.
Boost the power of corporations and erode the power of government until it becomes a mere figurehead, a rubber stamp for corporate lobbyist written laws. The 3 branches of government changing to a ceremonial role, like the British royal family did a scant century or so ago.
All power residing in corporate boardrooms. None with the representatives of we the people. That's the bottomline of invasion, occupation, and nation building of countries that are located over vast pools of oil.
Total transfer of the control of capital from government to corporations. And eventually to complete corporate governance
Friday, September 15
by
amazngdrx
on Fri 15 Sep 2006 01:23 AM CDT
Thursday, September 7
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 07 Sep 2006 05:18 PM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/another_roadmap.html#comment-22120140 What they omit is the fact that geothermal heat pump heating and cooling and conservation from super efficient lighting and appliances could save enough juice to charge all the cars. And car mileage can be vastly reduced by bikes, car pooling, and coordinated commuter bus and rail. Doubling generation capacity is not necessary to go to plugin transportation. Solar, especially the new higher efficiency solar cells, on all the suitable roof space and over parking lots and highways, and medium and small wind systems can provide 1/2 of our present electric use. The other half can come from huge wind systems on the northern great plains, and huge wind/wave power floating platforms off the three US coasts. This is all doable for less than that trillion dollar distribution grid upgrade. This is distributed generation and storage with whole regions down to individual homes independent of the larger grid in emergencies. This plan is too heavy with liquid fuel dependence too. Go battery, forget the coal to gasoline route. Forget nukes, they are way too expensive. For instance, half of our present capacity, 300,000 mw, would cost 2 trillion alone at current nuke plant cost estimates. And couldn't be done for 50 years, if it could be done at all. With wind, wave, and solar it will cost less than the trillion dollar distribution upgrade. 100 billion in subsidies taken from corporate welfare per year, and directed to this renewable energy effort would do the job within 10 years. One third of the cost from (corporate) welfare savings and the rest from private investment. For instance, if you install a 12,000 dollar solar system you get a 4000 dollar tax break over a few years. The money that used to go to exxonmob and friends goes to help pay for your solar system instead. Then your solar system will pay for itself in electric bill savings in 8 years. In the case of huge wind or wind/wave power installations. A utility company will put up 10 50mw wind machines out on the plains then get a rebate that pays for a third of the system. Money that once went to exxonmob goes to your local utility to save you money on your electric bill by importing clean, cheap wind electricity. Whoops, left out solar concentrator plants. I think they are great at rehabilitated old industrial and mining sites, these are already devestated areas. They pay for the enviro clean up. Put up silicon fabs, foundries, glass and metal recycling plants all powered by direct concentrating solar furnaces with PV and steam turbine electric cogeneration in suitable desert regions where solar is abundant. Water desalinization and waste water recycling using solar collectors can be used to cogenerate pV electricity and heat also. A 4 foot by 5 foot area of collector space can provide clean water daily for each person in a hot desert climate. Designed into roof mounted electric solar panels this water recycling could solve the looming water crisis.
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 07 Sep 2006 10:15 AM CDT
Can Warren buffet talk to his friend? The oracle must see this global climate disaster coming. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/will_calcars_st.html#comment-22094554 "cost-effective batteries and/or ultracaps are." And the only thing that is lacking is mass production of these latest nanotech batteries. Capital is being with held in order to protect vested interests in internal combustion, fossil fuel powered transportation. The resulting persistent emmission of CO 2 in turn is triggering massive releases of methane, with 21 times the effect as a green house gas as CO 2. Permafrost and undersea methane hydrate layers that hold back catastrophic releases of methane are melting. We need mass production of these batteries on a scale large enough to replace internal combustion with battery electric transportation charged up with renewable energy in 10 years. The Gates Foundation could do it. How about a billion dollar battery order or two Bill? Then donate the batteries to cities that signed on to the agreement to purchase plugin cars. NYC is converting cars to use as taxis. Wednesday, September 6
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 06 Sep 2006 06:38 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/will_calcars_st.html#comment-21997155 Cal cars should sell the conversion kits for hybrid to plugin hybrid, then branch out into electric vehicle conversions for economy cars. As well as various types of EV backup generator addons, like internal combustion or fuel cell/microturbine. They could sell whole conversions by contracting assembley lines that would do mass production conversions of certain models in manufacturing time blocks. Cal cars could presell conversions to car owners. The cities that signed on to buy plugin hybrids could help fund the startup effort and get the first converted cars. Don't start a car company, that is the wrong focus for the limited capital available. I think the other electric car startups need to go to kit conversion also. Maybe that's the kind of deal cal car could make, offer different conversion kits based on different battery and power packages from different companies. Like the Dell computer business model. It was very successful with PCs it might work for personal electric cars too. Make Calcars the idea and marketing and financial template to connect consumers with manufacturers that make conversion components and packaged systems and do conversions. Saturday, September 2
by
amazngdrx
on Sat 02 Sep 2006 05:08 PM CDT
Just as certain animals; dogs, cats, cows evolved symbiotically with humans, so did certain plants. Corn, wheat, grains, vegetables, fruit trees all suceed because they help their huiman partners suceed. Medicinal plants do too. Most of the commercial medicines available now were discovered by biochemists exploring traditional herbal cures. Getting back to that root of healthcare, symbiosis between medicine plants and humans might just cure the problems with the rising cost of healthcare that makes it unafordable for most of the people on spaceship earth who need it. Uninsured in the US? They have to treat you anyway. For the billions in the poorer countries it's either Doctors Without Borders or some other heroic NGO or nothing. Going back to symbniosis with the natural world could reveal a treasure trove of medical enlightenment. Let the developed world lead the way! Tuesday, August 29
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 29 Aug 2006 11:41 PM CDT
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/08/pmls_inwheel_mo.html 80 mpg with a standard internal combustion generator. And 2 hours driving on batteries before you need to use it. With a solid oxide fuel cell of the new CeO2 variety coupled to a microturbine this car could get 400 mpg on any liquid fuel. Destruction of Earth's climate as we know it could be stopped with this technology.
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 29 Aug 2006 08:35 AM CDT
http://greenlagirl.com/2006/08/27/interesting-quote-how-to-fix-agriculture My comments on her thread: Well he forgot to add: Take half the money saved from eliminating corporate welfare and turn it into tax incentives for small, local, organic farming. use the other half to pay down the deficit. Use a few percenty of the first half to fund research into robotic farming designed to make organic farming using renewable electric power more efficient than chemical, diesel fueled, labor intensive farming. That way organic farmers with a few acres can do it themselves on their computer connected robot that fertilizes (organic), waters, weeds,plants, harvests, all the stuff you would need to break your back doing, or break someone eles back, for below minimum wage. Why do people use herbicide? Too much time and effort it takes to do it manually. Same with fertilizer, irrigation, and pesticides. Squash potato bugs manually? Yikes. But a robot will vacuum them up and feed ‘em to your chickens, bwwaaaacckk (happy chicken music). Now go tell some really rich garden loving people about this you LAers, maybe Laury David will fund this? You go LAgirl! Wednesday, August 23
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 23 Aug 2006 09:28 AM CDT
Materials in catalytic converters recycled to make fuel cells that boost mileage 5 times over regular internal combustion engines? http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/08/franklin_fuels_.html Could CeO2 for these fuel cells be recycled from catalytic converters? The platinum recovery might pay for the process. The high melting point of the material could be attained with a solar furnace. Surface contaminants and the remaining platinum could be vaporized from the surface with concentrated solar power, then the CeO2 melted and purified and formed into the appropriate shape. Technology that feeds off of recycled internal combustion vehicles to produce new fuel cell electric vehicles could be very cost effective. Rather than a whole new vehicle, remove the ICE parts then install the fuel cell electric parts recycled from parts from other applications, like three phase industrial motors, turbo chargers, and catalytic converters. It looks like first adopters of these new systems will be do it yourselfers not large industrial automakers. Monday, August 21
by
amazngdrx
on Mon 21 Aug 2006 07:59 AM CDT
Saturday, August 19
by
amazngdrx
on Sat 19 Aug 2006 09:37 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/08/franklin_fuels_.html This could make a backup generator for electric cars based on fuel cell/microturbine technology a reality. True multi-fuel capability, high efficiency, low weight, and low cost; all the qualities that are needed to replace internal combustion. Since the new nano tech lithium ion batteries are so very expensive, only about a 50 mile range for an electric car is practical on batteries alone. That is enough for most driving miles, but a good backup generator is needed to make electric cars able to compete in terms of utility with internal combustion. This sounds like the technology that will do it. Coupled with a microturbine and electric drivetrain in an economy car it could give 200+ mpg on liquid fuel alone. And it would run on the cheapest liquid fuels. And the whole design would fit into the space normally dedicated to an ICE (internal combustion engine), transmission, and related systems, at equal to or less that the ICE weight.
Wednesday, July 26
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 26 Jul 2006 10:28 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/07/myers_motors_ne.html "Does anyone sell a reasonably priced kit for a DIY conversion?" I haven't found one yet George, but am expecting that to occur soon. The problem is that these devices are not mass produced. Many have very expensive electronic controllers that use really high power silicon parts. Those parts are expensive because silicon is in such short supply, used up by computer, solar cell, and other manufacturers. Silicon fabs are the choke point. Since silicon, derived from sand is one of the most plentiful elements on the planet, this is a problem of capital allocation. Solar powered silicon fabs would already have blossomed in desert areas all over the world to meet soaring demand from the solar power industry alone, if capital markets were not largely controlled by banking interests that back fossil fuel monopoly. A possible solution for the kit market? Adapt plentiful, inexpensive,even salvaged, mass produced three phase industrial motors. The three phase AC current produced by a simple rotary brush type system from the DC of the battery bank. No expensive, high power semiconductors or expensive low production motors like those from AC Propulsion. Brushes were good enough for all kinds of DC motors, why not for DIY car conversions. So they need replacement ocasionally? So what. My 40 year old Milwaukee power tools need brush replacement every 20 years or so too. The big thing is battery cost. Use cheap lead acid with all their problems or go with the latest ultra-expensive, quick charge lithium ion nano batteries? Either way a 40 mile range or so on batteries will be all one can afford in cash or in weight. My answer is a fuel pellet/corn powered high RPM trunk sized steam turbine generator. It fires up for longer trips or for high acceleration situations. High RPM means high power output in a small package. If you saw the video of Jay Leno's Stanley Steamer (it must be somewhere out there on the net) zooming along in LA traffic, you will remember Leno explained that the reason internal combustion replaced steam was that it took 20 minutes or so to get the steam pressure up in the Stanley. So the more convenient instant on gas engine replaced it. With an electric car, the steam turbine generator would have the time it needed to get going, as batteries would power the first 40 miles or so. The equivalent gas mileage powered by wood or cellulose waste fuel pellets? What would it cost compared to a gallon of gas? The internal combustion engine can maybe reach 14% efficiency. The steam turbine typically exceeds 30%. And if one only needs the steam backup on trips over 40 miles between charges? Well we are talking huge savings that would more than justify the cost of the turbine. I am thinking of a turbocharger normally designed for boosting power from a car engine to run from a flashboiler powered by pellets. The compressor side of the turbocharger would have a permanet magnet rotor mounted on it that generates power through fixed coils around it. And who knows, a high temp fuel cell that can use fuel pellets maybe along soon to boost that 30% efficient steam turbine to 70%? Tuesday, July 11
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 11 Jul 2006 10:07 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/07/cryogenic_super.html#comment-19545453 Well Thomas, let them talk nukes all they want. I just don't think they're cost effective. Remote cluster reactors are a good compromise on nukes. I think we renewable fans could use this as a negotiating point to get subsidies shifted from fossil and nuclear corporations to tax incentives for homeowners and small businesses for wind, solar, and electric plugin hybrids and pure EVs. They get a second chance, we get a fair playing field. Put the new nuclear reactors in remote areas where contamination already exists like Yucca mountain or Hanford, the power can be moved easily compared to the waste later on. Let the industry prove itself on cost, safety, and waste. But as far as the real winners? Well I'm glad this article brings up superconduction. Because instead of thousands of miles of superconducting cables with liquid hydrogen pipes surrounding it, smaller rings of this material with safe liquid nitrogen supercooling could store all the wind, solar, and wave power needed in a regional grid. It's like a zero loss flywheel where the electricity does the spinning. Even the negative assessment on the capacity of wind and capacity factor leaves the government admitting solar can and must fill the gap. I think much larger wind machines on the planes and on floating platforms offshore that double as wave power stations could power everything alone. There is no reason to insist on that though. The better strategy is to agree and admit we only expect maybe one third of our power from large wind and wave machines. Then propose distributed power generation and storage from home sized wind and solar roof panels on every roof that is suitable to provide the next third. And going to efficiency gains for the remaining third. Much more mass transportation, ride sharing, bike trails, and telecommuting for work. Electric cars,super insulated homes, a new generation of energy efficient appliances, geothermal/solar heat pump heating, domestic water heating, and air conditioning. Also industrial efficiency gains. Like using wind powered heat pumps and solar for refining ethanol. Electric plugin tractors and construction equipment. I would say the admissions in this report give us the final negotiating position we needed to prove renewables can carry the whole energy supply burden. Let them try nukes and "clean" coal. But verify cost effectiveness. Renewables will win in a fair fight. Real capitalism minus subsidies would provide that fair market competition. Let the games begin (well they already have). This is engineering and political strategy now. Prove the voters will get lower costs with renewables and we win in the end. Hope it is in time to head off global climate disaster.
Monday, July 3
by
amazngdrx
on Mon 03 Jul 2006 10:52 AM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/07/re_the_false_ho.html More happy fuel farming fanstasy. This study assumes 10% of transportation fuel coming from biomass by 2020. As the study proposes to supply that amount by converting more photosynthetic bio-energy to fuel that is burned, that will exacerbate climate change. All the land that can be converted to carbon sink, either through more reserve land or returning as much biomass as possible to the soil through organic farming, is needed to reverse CO 2 climate problems. Between non-CO 2 emmitting electric renewable power used in PHEVs and EVs and liquid fuel generated with algae in solar systems, the economic and war related problems of importing oil and the even bigger problem of CO 2 climate change can be solved simultaneously. Trying to use fuel farming to replace oil will only replace a fraction of it and actually degrade the present level of the carbon sink effect of conserrvation reserve land and sustainable farming practices that build soil organically by recyclng biomass. The illusion that fuel farming actually can solve these problems is a dangerous one. It makes the release of methane from permafrost practically inevitable as CO 2 levels continue to rise. That will overwhelm the climate system and cost far more than conversion to renewable electric transportation power and carbon sink sequestration with more conservation reserve land would. Just the increasing storms and droughts alone will cost many orders of magnitude more than investment in mass production and adoption of renewable electric battery powered vehicles. In fact the economic boom from renewable energy will pay back these investments within a few years.. And how can anyone envision agricultural yields actually increasing (as this study does) with ever increasing weather volatility? The reverse is true, the water needed for even present ag production levels is rapidly being depleted as aquifers are destroyed with overuse and pollution. It is interesting that renewable electric transportation advocates are often accused of over optimistic predictions given the very obvious unrealistic assumptions behind fuel farming The Washinginton Post is onto the scamming. Which is understandable (though unexpected) given the huge corporate fuel farming subsidies channeled through DC lobbying corruption. Farm and environmental votes are being bought with this greenwashing. and farmers get none of the money doled out that adds to our huge national debt (mainly held by China), it all goes to politically connected agribizz corporations like Archer Daniels Midland. Thursday, June 29
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 29 Jun 2006 09:30 AM CDT
Bloggers seem to jump to conclusions.
Then other bloggers jump on their conslusions. with all kinds of criticism from scientific sources even. For instance: when many of us said, Katrina is a result of global climate change, more extreme weather variations. More severe storms. In this case due to hihger average water temperatures, the heat engine that drives the hurricane. That seemed plausible. We were soundly denounced by other bloggers with lots of scientific support, printed in the corporate media. Now a year later, scientific reports are coming around to our conslusion. I just wonder if the radical prediction that fuel farming, nuclear, and fossil power will be abandoned in favor of renewable electric powered transportation (at a relative cost of 75 cents per electric "gallon"), will have a similiar fate. Come on Subaru, make it so. Warp 7.
by
amazngdrx
on Thu 29 Jun 2006 09:26 AM CDT
A discussion on "The Energy Blog" on EV battery mass production.
Well Thomas I found an explanation of the manufacturing process for these new batteries. Sheet metal is rolled out on a line then sprayed with various coatings that are then baked on. Then the sheet is rolled up for maximum surface area in the smallest space. Nothing exotic in these batteries either. The nano layer materials are made in a separate process then sprayed on just as the other materials. The nano layer provides a low resistance, high current flow because a uniform very thin layer is possible to prevent arcing within the battery. It appears that only mass production is lacking to bring the cost down, just as with solar cells. Think of this process of mass production of batteries and solar panels in this effort to stop global climate change and oil wars versus the Manhattan Project during WW 2. The technical difficulties and danger involved in the atom bomb project were orders of magnitude more challenging. And yet we still don't have the will or leadership to win this time around. As Al Gore said, even a nuclear war would leave most of this planet inhabitable, people still live in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. But how can civilization withstand the weather volatility in evidence right now. The cleanup and economic losses will mount into the 100s of trillions very quickly as more violent storms bring flooding and drought conditions bring on catastrophic crop failure and fires. And how do you move whole cities back from flooding coastlines? Wouldn't mass producing these renewable energy systems be much less expensive? And at the same time revive the flagging US manufacturing sector and restore the tax base? As with the internet boom, this renewable energy boom would start to pay down the deficit and the national debt. The internet boom went bust, not everyone needed or wanted to use the net. This energy boom will be different, decades long, powered by productivity gains built into every economic sector underlying all industrial activity. Monday, June 26
by
amazngdrx
on Mon 26 Jun 2006 04:13 AM CDT
Some guesses about the state of electric car progress behind the scenes at leading global automakers. Will Subaru show Honda and Toyota the way to save the planet from global climate disaster and make Detroit a ghost town?
A GM PHEV? Highly doubtful, probably more hype like flex fuel vehicles.
Meanwhile Subaru, owned by Fuji Heavy, leapfrogs GM and Toyota right to electric cars. And GM has a signifigant stake in Fuji.
Maybe Toyota is not rushing PHEVs because they have an electric car to pull out of their hat? That battery excuse from Toyota is patently lame with at least 3 different nano layer, quick charge, lithium ions at or near the manufacturing stage.
Think about it: Why produce a PHEV with thousands of moving parts and an antiquated, 14% efficient internal combustion engine, when one could produce a quick charge plugin electric car with the same performance and range.
That runs on 75 cent per gallon of gas equivalent electric power. And has only on the order of 100s of moving parts.
The profit advantage (before gas prices made a rebate eat those profits up)of trucks and SUVs for ford and GM was based upon this same principle.
Same number of parts in an SUV as in a car, but the SUV sold at a heavy premium because of the larger size. The extra steel did not add signifigantly to the manufacturing cost, so the Detroit rust belt did ok versus Toyota's economy cars.
But as gas prices rise, the same phenomenon will kill Detrot. Toyota can produce electric cars with 100s of moving parts, instead of thousands, with a corresponding drop in manufacturing costs, and consumers can save 100s of bucks per month on gas that can go towards the car payments for their new electric cars.
But now, just as Subaru poineered the all wheel drive, SUV like economy car, they are now pioneering the electric car. Honda and Toyota are following suit. Will they miss out on the electric car? Not bluudy lackly (my cockney accent, hehey).
Sunday, June 11
by
amazngdrx
on Sun 11 Jun 2006 02:19 AM CDT
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/6/8/165835/4175 Great discussion Karen
Yes fossil fuel is awful at the scale it is currently used. So is nuclear power. The solution is blowing in the wind, the cleanest, cheapest, immediate replacement for fossil fuel and ever widening nuclear contamination. At the Paduchah Kentucky plant that makes all the fuel for nuclear power plants, plutonium has been spreading out into the groundwater for decades. The contamination of this resource, that is vital to life itself, has spread miles already during the industry coverup. It is flowing into the confluence of the Ohio and Tennessee rivers down through the Mississippi valley to the gulf. Have you eaten any Louisuana quisine lately? Crawfish and shrimp from that wonderful ecosystem? What is life itself in all its wonderful variety of experience worth? Can you insure life itself for "accidents" like this plutonium contamination of a whole region? Give it up. Go solar, go electric. Oil, coal, nuclear fission must all become just a horrible warning from history or there will be no one to read a history book left. The dark future of spaceship earth impelled by evil men like Lord Cheney of Halliburton. Hehey. Dark humor? Better to laugh than cry. Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it. Tuesday, June 6
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 06 Jun 2006 06:50 AM CDT
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/05/23/008209.html This one uses titanium oxide nano layer on the cathode. The stuff that makes paint white, titanium oxide. With nano-tech! Renewable electric transportation is coming, oily dinosaur corporatitstas can't stop it. They can slow it down though, until all our money is in their pockets and we can't afford to mass produce it.
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 06 Jun 2006 12:23 AM CDT
http://athensnews.com/issue/article.php3?story_id=25082 Solar powered airship 12 miles high! Why? To spy. Really big blimp. Geosynchronous. Sunday, May 21
by
amazngdrx
on Sun 21 May 2006 01:10 PM CDT
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/5/19/194157/712#1 Thanks d. The status of becoming anti-gas-guzzler-status. Kind of dialectic! Saw a huge, obscene stretch hummer limo out in front of a prom party at the Duluth convention center last night. Teens seeking status. I was there for a John Prine concert. He revived his Vietnam era anti-war song. Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore "While digesting Reader's Digest Chorus: "Well, I went to the bank this morning Repeat Chorus: "Well, I got my window shield so filled "But your flag decal won't get you Commenting before the last chorus: "I wrote this song in 1968, and put it on the mantle in 1975. I revived it by a special request from the president. He doesn't know it, but he asked for it." He did his new anti-war song too. To thunderous roaring applause! "Have you ever noticed, when you're feeling really good "Some humans ain't human, some people ain't kind http://www.lyricsdir.com/john-prine-some-humans-aint-human-lyrics.html Wednesday, May 17
by
amazngdrx
on Wed 17 May 2006 12:43 AM CDT
The nations that export oil that fear the Bush administration warring for oil are changing their oil transaction currency to Euros as a defensive move against the corporate servant administration. This administration does what is good for Exxon, Halliburton, and Bechtel. But that is not what is good for this nation. As this financial attack on the dollar, by switching to Euros for oil trading, debilitates our debt ridden economy we the people suffer. The corporate class that this neoconservative cabal pulling the president's strings represents would rather manufacture in low wage, no regulation, no tax areas. No more feeding high wages to labor unions and bribes to environmental regulators. America has been betrayed and hung out to dry, while corporate assets are already hedged for this Dollar to Euro shift. We the people are left with an unpayable national debt due to the weakening dollar and Bush administration runaway spending through corporate welfare like the lease giveaway to big oil and war contracts with Halliburton. Saturday, May 13
by
amazngdrx
on Sat 13 May 2006 05:29 AM CDT
From a discussion on "The Energy blog": http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/05/bill_ford_ceo_o.html#comment-17233702
Here is the economics of a home based solar/wind system charging a plugin. The typical electric power consumption is 10,000 kwh per year per home. Cut that in half for a super insulated, smaller home that features solar/wind heating/cooling and the latest flat screen tv/computer technology, mini-flourescent lighting, and energy efficient appliances. Typical gasoline consumption for a very efficient car is around 8 gallons per week. Figure 500 gallons per year to be safe. A conservative estimate of 7.5 kwh, in a plugin vehicle, equal to one gallon of gas in a gas powered car means that around 4000 kwh would more than do it. That original 10,000 kwh per year would power this system. A rooftop and parking area solar system that produces electric power and heat, combined with a home sized wind system could produce enough power to do this in many locations. And actually produce enough extra to sell into the grid to offset remote charging of the plugin car too. Wind, water, and solar power on a larger scale could power the homes, buildings, and vehicles not covered by their own systems. These larger installations could also power industrial and commercial applications. Only a fraction of a percent of land and sea area would be needed to do the job. It's a shame that the capital needed to acomplish this is squandered on oil wars, wasting energy, and the greenhouse gas destruction of life as we know it here on spaceship earth. Were even the subsidies to the oil industry alone given to homeowners instead, to install these systems and purchase plugins, the capital needed would naturally flow to meet the demand created. The resulting mass production would bring costs down impelling a frenzy of investment. Like the former booms created by techological advances, but powered by renewable energy, providing a sustainable growth curve rather than the boom and bust of former economic cycles based on less substantial footing. Tuesday, May 2
by
amazngdrx
on Tue 02 May 2006 11:42 PM CDT
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/10/lithium_ion_pow.html#comment-16828283 This confirms my guess here! http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2006/4/13/1884417.html I guessed 70 pounds per gallon of gas equivalent. This one is about 75. And I guessed 250 wh per kg, this battery is 225wh per kg. The 6 to 8 hour charge time and 2004 build time frame makes me think that the nano tech batteries maybe even better, as they have the 5 minute charge to 90% they may have even higher energy density than the batteries in this project. But the basic weight to power ratio and range design factors hold. Making the design a practical alternative to liquid fuel. That is with the quick charge A 123 or Hitachi nano-phosphate lithoium ion. Or if this battery can be charged quckly enough to compete with the convenience of liquid refueling speed like the A 123 battery can. At 70k and 300 bucks per kwh this system is expensive, but mass production could bring that down. That means the battery is 12k alone. But a 25k total price with a 20% profit margin might still be possible,given mass production, that's reasonable. Typically components like these batteries come down in price rapidly with mass production and continuing research, just as microchips did and now PV cells are dropping in price. Monday, May 1
by
amazngdrx
on Mon 01 May 2006 05:44 AM CDT
Donald Trump and Imus talking about wave power and wind power? Yep. Trump just said oil could be replaced in 10 to 15 years. No dispute from Imus or even the righties on his show? Cheney listens to Imus everyday as do a lot of influential people. This has to chap his wrinkled ass. Maybe Imus will adopt altrernative energy like he has adopted alternative cleaning products and vegetarianism? Sunday, April 30
by
amazngdrx
on Sun 30 Apr 2006 10:59 AM CDT
Organic farms as good as jungle, prairie, and coral reef at storing extra CO 2? I think so. Where to find an article on how conversion to organic agriculture would restore depleted soil to act as a carbon sink. As it did before being converted to chemical agriculture. The key question? How much carbon is stored in healthy organic soil? Chemical ag destroyed soil must be near zero. With the huge land area devoted to agriculture could this reverse global climate disaster all on its own? If one thinks of photosynthesis as nature's main mechanism to restore the greenhouse gas atmospheric balance to pre-human created combustion related catastrophic change, then that huge land area as a carbon sink might just be the difference that saves us, along with renewable energy replacing fossil, chemical fuel farming, and nuclear. In a natural prairie layer after layer of soil can accumulate over time. Just how much carbon can this natural soil store. Or say crop land where organic soil was fed 90% of the biomass of the crop (return the hay, manure, cornstaks, all back in.). Could it be enough to swing the carbon balance a few percentage points, maybe make a crucial difference? We are talking only slight rises in average temperature over decades. And huge areas of the earth's surface that could store carbon. The healthy soil would also increase agricultural efficiency, decrease land area needed, and improve the quality and lower the chemical toxicity of food. New water management policy could really help this effort. In order to restore the wetlands and aquifers that farming depends upon, a new sort of dam and levy system on river systems needs to be used. Many areas drained for agriculture and protected by levees need to become wetlands again. With locks built into levees to let flood waters into these areas and then later let them drain back into the river. Residents can have homes built on concrete barge foundations to cope with flooding as they are doing in the Netherlands. The wetlands restore the aquifers pumped dry and polluted by chemical agrictlture. Wind pumps can even pump the excess water up into higher and higher wetland areas to bring water to regions that now pump rivers dry, like the Colorado. Why have flooding damage in northern Caloformia and drought in southern? This would distribute water out and increase the photosynthetic CO 2 absorption. Natural wetlands are a huge carbon sink. Water is becoming a limiting factor in restoring global climate balance. |
Recent Photos
Recent Articles
This Month
Login
|
|
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/09/google_starts_p.html#comment-22434269
Excellent! Notice they are not building one, but rather converting. A much better plan.
Will they follow this up by building a plugin electric drivetrain with a solid oxide fuel cell/microturbine backup generator. That's the real next generation design.
And then use an assembley line conversion process along with selling individual conversion kits. This is google so maybe it will happen.
Why can't anyone else beat google in terms of internet business models? Maybe they will show us why not with this effort?
I don't expect some clunky transmission connected electric motor/internal combustion mutation from them, but then they DID mention ethanol. The inefficient subsidy sucking technology that Gates fell for with his charity.