I feel like this little kid when it comes to explaining how we will need 13,018,022,473,988 MORE kWh IF all cars and trucks are EVs!

[fncceo]

hoping that alternative forms of energy fail.

It's not a matter of hoping alternative forms of energy fail. It's knowing full well the disaster that will befall us if we are forced to adopt, for political reasons, something that is not ready to replace what we have.

The world gave up whale oil without a second thought, when petroleum distillates achieved the magic point of price and availability that made the switch an easy decision.

Despite the fact that whale oil is eminently renewable.

 

[candycorn]

It's not a matter of hoping alternative forms of energy fail.

Can you think of one that you hope succeeds? I know you'll say nuclear...any other ones?

 

[Stryder50]

Someday, I hope you will hear about Solar, Wind and other forms of energy which also be used to create electricity in order to light homes, make planes fly, and many other possibilities.

Solar and Wind require extensive amounts of petroleum to make their components.
Do you have a clue how many of such will be needed to meet not only current electrical requirements, but future ones when carbon fuels are removed from use?

Try getting a brain and using it!

 

[Stryder50]

They already exist. Keep up with the times.

Very limited range, duration, and lifting capacity.

 

[fncceo]

Can you think of one that you hope succeeds? I know you'll say nuclear...any other ones?

Actually, fissionable nuclear is a dead end. If we made the very sizeable investment to replace all our current fossil-based technology, there is still the very long term problem of disposal of the vast amounts of spent nuclear fuel we would generate.

Any alternative to our current system is non-viable if power can't be generated on demand. Our entire power grid is built for generation, not for storage. We currently don't have the technology to store the amount of power required to supply even a medium-sized city with batteries.

I really think our power generation needs of the future need to develop in two different paths.

1. To do everything we can to minimize the waste products of fossil fuel. That means cleaner coal, CO scrubbers, and more efficient natural gas generation. Expand existing geothermal and hydroelectric.

2. Put a lot more into Hydrogen Fusion research. That means REALLY clean electricity in amounts we can barely conceive. If we take all the money we currently piss away subsidizing inefficient electric cars and put that into fusion research, we may see its benefits in my (excessively short) remaining lifetime.

 

[Stryder50]

Actually, fissionable nuclear is a dead end. If we made the very sizeable investment to replace all our current fossil-based technology, there is still the very long term problem of disposal of the vast amounts of spent nuclear fuel we would generate.

Any alternative to our current system is non-viable if power can't be generated on demand. Our entire power grid is built for generation, not for storage. We currently don't have the technology to store the amount of power required to supply even a medium-sized city with batteries.

I really think our power generation needs of the future need to develop in two different paths.

1. To do everything we can to minimize the waste products of fossil fuel. That means cleaner coal, CO scrubbers, and more efficient natural gas generation. Expand existing geothermal and hydroelectric.

2. Put a lot more into Hydrogen Fusion research. That means REALLY clean electricity in amounts we can barely conceive. If we take all the money we currently piss away subsidizing inefficient electric cars and put that into fusion research, we may see its benefits in my (excessively short) remaining lifetime.

First of all, get the "fossil" out of your thinking. Try carbon fuel. Wood is one example, where you can grow more to replace what you cut down. There are also crops being grown to provide fuel, such as ethanol.

"clean coal" depends on what is done with the flue/smoke resulting from combustion, not so much which type of coal you use. Major pollutant is sulfur dioxide - SO2 - which produces acid rain when it gets into the atmosphere and mixes with water vapor. Hence the development of Flue Gas Desulfurization, FGD, technologies.

Flue-gas desulfurization - Wikipedia​

Flue-Gas Desulphurization - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics​

flue gas desulfurization at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

My last place of employment we made components for FGD applications. Once the sulfur is removed, that white "smoke" coming out of the stack is water vapor~steam loaded with CO2, Carbon Dioxide. Very little CO = Carbon Monoxide.

CO2 is what plants need to live and they are about 99+% of life on this planet. 400ppm is just barely enough for them to survive on.

One of the last jobs we worked on before I retired from there was a project up in Canada where FGD by-product, warm H2O vapor and CO2, were piped into a huge greenhouse complex that grew hothouse tomatoes. Interesting how useful that evil pollution carbon dioxide is.

 

[Stryder50]

I could never quite figure out the glee the right wing (and others on the left) take when it comes to hoping that alternative forms of energy fail.

Its almost as if they think we have a truly endless supply of coal, oil, timber, etc...

You think there's an endless supply of wind?
Guess you don't understand weather.

Think the Sun will burn for all eternity?
Even hear of novas and white dwarfs?

It's not "glee", you idiot, it's being pragmatic about the limitations of wind and solar as replacements for carbon fuels/resources.

 

[candycorn]

Actually, fissionable nuclear is a dead end. If we made the very sizeable investment to replace all our current fossil-based technology, there is still the very long term problem of disposal of the vast amounts of spent nuclear fuel we would generate.

Any alternative to our current system is non-viable if power can't be generated on demand. Our entire power grid is built for generation, not for storage. We currently don't have the technology to store the amount of power required to supply even a medium-sized city with batteries.

I really think our power generation needs of the future need to develop in two different paths.

1. To do everything we can to minimize the waste products of fossil fuel. That means cleaner coal, CO scrubbers, and more efficient natural gas generation. Expand existing geothermal and hydroelectric.

2. Put a lot more into Hydrogen Fusion research. That means REALLY clean electricity in amounts we can barely conceive. If we take all the money we currently piss away subsidizing inefficient electric cars and put that into fusion research, we may see its benefits in my (excessively short) remaining lifetime.

Wow...we "may" see benefits.

Sounds like the same arguments people are making about the current renewables.

It sounds to me like we need a mix. But what is, of course, ignored by right wing loons is that we're going to, at some point, run out of oil and coal.

 

[Stryder50]

It's not a matter of hoping alternative forms of energy fail. It's knowing full well the disaster that will befall us if we are forced to adopt, for political reasons, something that is not ready to replace what we have.

The world gave up whale oil without a second thought, when petroleum distillates achieved the magic point of price and availability that made the switch an easy decision.

Despite the fact that whale oil is eminently renewable.

Actually, the whales were over hunted to point of extinction and that source of fuel and product material was rapidly disappearing. Came a quick need for a replacement source and petroleum was there and plentiful and affordable given that the whales were nearly non-existent (and correspondingly expensive).

Whale oil is only renewable if the harvesting is kept very low.

 

[candycorn]

You think there's an endless supply of wind?
Guess you don't understand weather.

I drive by windfarms every day. Seldom, if ever, are they all stationary.

Think the Sun will burn for all eternity?
Even here of novas and white dwarfs?

If the sun stops burning we just may have bigger problems than trying to argue over who was right about energy.

It's not "glee", you idiot, it's being pragmatic about the limitations of wind and solar as replacements for carbon fuels/resources.

Okay...tell us what form of renewable energy you hope succeeds.

 

[Stryder50]

Wow...we "may" see benefits.

Sounds like the same arguments people are making about the current renewables.

It sounds to me like we need a mix. But what is, of course, ignored by right wing loons is that we're going to, at some point, run out of oil and coal.

We live on a finite planet. Not only are there limits on carbon resources, but also even more so on the more rare metals and minerals needed for the batteries required to storage electrical capacity for demand use and transportation applications.

Meanwhile, take a look at how much of Earth's crust contains carbon.

 

[Stryder50]

I drive by windfarms every day. Seldom, if ever, are they all stationary.

If the stun stops burning we just may have bigger problems than trying to argue over who was right about energy.

Okay...tell us what form of renewable energy you hope succeeds.

I've often driven by many that were not spinning.
Also, the blades and gears turn out not to have the expected life span to pay off their costs, nor are those blades recyclable. Collectively wind is very expensive kilowatts.

Also, wind is moving air masses which is how we get weather. Take away too much of that energy from moving air and you start to have some changes in weather ~ climate. There's a limit to how much wind is "renewable".

And "renewable" is another misnomer. Technically hydro might be the best renewable, but again there is an environmental cost.

Solar has a heavy raw materials and energy cost to produce those solar panels and they barely live long enough to cover cost of making. Also wind and solar use up more land area than other sources of energy.

Nuclear, especially fusion if ever perfected would be the best source for now and near future. But like everything, has it's costs and limitations.

Solar via orbital arrays might be the best solution in the long run, but requires a bit of seed funding in space transport, and off world mining and manufacturing. This would be the best reason to continue and expand space programs, getting manufacturing and energy activity off the planet and reducing impact on the environment.

 

[fncceo]

Whale oil is only renewable of the harvesting is kept very low.

Pump Barry White music and whale pheromones into the ocean and we'll be using whale oil to fuel our cars.

 

[Stryder50]

I drive by windfarms every day. Seldom, if ever, are they all stationary.

If the sun stops burning we just may have bigger problems than trying to argue over who was right about energy.

Okay...tell us what form of renewable energy you hope succeeds.

Did you read and understand the OP ~ Opening Post here?
The one listing all the other uses of petroleum besides as a fuel source?
By the way, much of our vinyl is made from natural gas, FWIW.

It's more than energy that is part of the equation.
You were right of sorts in another post, it will take a mix of energy resources for many generations, if not indefinitely.

 

[Stryder50]

Pump Barry White music and whale pheromones into the ocean and we'll be using whale oil to fuel our cars.

View attachment 707968

Amusing.
Alas, whale "oil" lacks the versatility of petroleum.

 

[DudleySmith]

The Hans Christian Andersen. (1805–1875) Tales.
The Emperor’s New Clothes
MANY years ago there lived an Emperor, who was so excessively fond of grand new clothes that he spent all his money upon them, that he might be very fine. He did not care about his soldiers, nor about the theatre, and only liked to drive out and show his new clothes. He had a coat for every hour of the day; and just as they say of a king, “He is in council,” so they always said of him, “The Emperor is in the wardrobe.”
The Emperor took off his clothes, and the rogues pretended to put on him each new garment as it was ready; and the Emperor turned round and round before the mirror. “O, how well they look! how capitally they fit!” said all. “What a pattern! what colors! That is a splendid dress!”
No clothes of the Emperor’s had ever had such a success as these.
“But he has nothing on!” a little child cried out at last.
The Emperor: “I must go through with the procession.”

The Emperor’s New Clothes - Collection at Bartleby.com

The Emperor’s New Clothes MANY years ago there lived an Emperor, who was so excessively fond of grand new clothes that he spent all his money upon them, that he might be very fine.

www.bartleby.com

This is how I feel. Like the little kid pointing out that to do what Biden wants as he has said:
"I guarantee We Are Going To Get Rid of Fossil Fuels”


It will cost Americans over 13 trillion MORE kWh on top of the nearly 4.1 trillion kWh we currently use.
Where's it going to come from?
Why hasn't the MSM pointed this out?
To reach Emperor Biden's goal of ridden fossil fuels will mean total disaster for our country.
Simple things like... Tires. A single tire uses 7 gallons of oil...2 billion tires a year use over 250 million barrels... where's the replacement?

Global tire market forecast to produce over 2.7 billion tires by 2026 – Rubber World – The Technical Service Magazine for the Rubber Industry

rubberworld.com

A partial list of items made from a barrel of oil...
Here’s what just one barrel of crude oil can produce: https://elsegundo.chevron.com/our-businesses/whats-in-a-barrel-of-oil

• Enough liquefied gases (such as propane) to fill 12 small (14.1 ounce) cylinders for home, camping or workshop use.
• Enough gasoline to drive a medium-sized car (17 miles per gallon) over 280 miles.
• Asphalt to make about one gallon of tar for patching roofs or streets.
• Lubricants to make about a quart of motor oil.
• Enough distillate fuel to drive a large truck (five miles per gallon) for almost 40 miles. If jet fuel fraction is included, that same truck can run nearly 50 miles.
• Nearly 70 kilowatt hours of electricity at a power plant generated by residual fuel.
• About four pounds of charcoal briquettes.
• Wax for 170 birthday candles or 27 wax crayons.

There are enough petrochemicals left in that same barrel to provide the base for one of the following:
A petri dish (holds up to 2.5 ounces) with domestic crude oil being poured into it

• 39 polyester shirts
• 750 pocket combs
• 540 toothbrushes
• 65 plastic dustpans
• 23 hula hoops
• 65 plastic drinking cups
• 195 one-cup measuring cups
• 11 plastic telephone housings
• 135 four-inch rubber balls

The lighter materials in a barrel are used mainly for paint thinners and dry-cleaning solvents and they can make nearly a quart of one of these products.
The miscellaneous fraction of what is left still contains enough by-products to be used in medicinal oils, still gas, road oil and plant condensates –
a real industrial horn of plenty.
So again... what will replace the above items made from fossil fuels that Biden guarantees to "We Are Going To Get Rid of Fossil Fuels”

Don't worry about it; less than 5% of the population will be able to afford to buy one of those, so electricity demand isn't going up nearly that much. You will be living in 50 story high rise public buildings run by gangs of thugs who extort you and steal your stuff every couple of weeks or so, so your use of appliances and TV will drop as well. Even the electric bicycles are outrageously priced.

 

[candycorn]

You were right of sorts in another post, it will take a mix of energy resources for many generations, if not indefinitely

That seems to be a given.

 

[22lcidw]

Can you think of one that you hope succeeds? I know you'll say nuclear...any other ones?

The earth is not dying. We are acting like it is. Our civilization is dying because of insane people who crave power and money.

 

[candycorn]

The earth is not dying. We are acting like it is. Our civilization is dying because of insane people who crave power and money.

 

[elektra]

Actually, fissionable nuclear is a dead end. If we made the very sizeable investment to replace all our current fossil-based technology, there is still the very long term problem of disposal of the vast amounts of spent nuclear fuel we would generate.

Any alternative to our current system is non-viable if power can't be generated on demand.

I really think our power generation needs of the future need to develop in two different paths.

1. To do everything we can to minimize the waste products of fossil fuel. That means cleaner coal, CO scrubbers, and more efficient natural gas generation. Expand existing geothermal and hydroelectric.

Vast amounts of nuclear waste? Where do you get that idea from. Currently, we have no problem storing spent nuclear fuel. Of course it can be recyled as well, resulting in less waste. And instead of using technology from the last century we will be using new technology that creates a fraction of the waste that yesterdays reactors created.

Hydroelectric is already reacged it's dead end. All the great rivers have been damned. Some three times.

Geothermal is nasty expensive and extremely weak, as you open a geothermal well, just like a teapot, the pressure goes down. At least that is what happened at every single geothermal plant built in the USA.

Nuclear is the only way to go