NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's just pretend for a moment that you are the President of your country. Let's say that the oil shortage crisis is on the horizon. You got to find an alternative fuel for your country before everything goes to hell in a handbasket. So how would you adjust your country's economy and way of life to alternative fuels? Which alternative fuel would you use, and how soon do you think you could impliment it nationwide?

For my country the United States, I would do the following.

First, I would get rid of the oil company's monopoloy on the energy market. Then I would give a governmental contract to a company that could mass-produce Bio-Fuel. The Bio-Fuel can either come from plants, or from trash such as stated in this article. I would prefer the second option, because it would also solve the USA waste problem.

http://www.discover.com/issues/jul-04/features/anything-into-oil/

Hopefully, these companies are able to sell their oil in major cities. I also hope that the oil prices for the Bio-Fuel would be cheaper than organic oil. Hopefully, the market will favor the Bio-Fuel companies and let them take over. I think this would take anywhere from 10 years to 20 years. I would try to keep the government out of it as much as possible. However, if the market refuse to adjust to Bio-Fuel, then I would give it a little nudge.

Now share your plans!

I would use the heat of the decay of uranium to boil water. Then I would use the steam pressure to run a steam turbine engine that turns a generator to produce AC electricity. I would call the device a nuclear power plant.

I second the nuke proposal

we can use that action to generate hydrogen for our cars (I know its less practical but it could work)

I'd tell Schwinn to crank up production...;)

I would build a giant shell of solar pannels around the sun then run a big ass wire back to Earth.

I would

--Raise taxes on new oil/coal/gas plants

--subsadize construction of nuclear power plants

--Make high fuel efficiancy cars partially tax deductable

--raise the gas-guzzler tax

--That bio-oil stuff looks really promicing

--increce federal funding of fusion power plant reserch and fuel-cell car reserch.

please excuse my spelling...

I think I would start mandating new building construction have the roofs covered with photovoltaic cells and existing buildings be retrofitted within 10 years. If one uses their energy wisely, one could wind up getting paid by the electric utility for producing more energy than consumed.

hydrogen cells. clean, no moving parts required.

Then I would give a governmental contract to a company that could mass-produce Bio-Fuel. The Bio-Fuel can either come from plants, or from trash such as stated in this article. I would prefer the second option, because it would also solve the USA waste problem.

Good idea, but if that was possible to do cheaper, it'd have been done already. I'm sure it'd be extremely expensive. I know my idea wouldn't work much better, but as long as we're in our own little happy-land: My Ideal Energy Solution! (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Rough_Gay_Wolf_Sex)

I would push for tax incentives for conservation techniques for private home owners, property renters and public business buidings. Such techniques will include solid state lighting, flourescentsand increased insulation. Tax breaks for such personal energy techologies such as solar and wind. Research grants and subsidies for developing Thermal depolymerization as a sewage treatment and a garbage-to-energy solution in major U.S. cities. Tax breaks for individuals that purchase hybrids and other fuel efficient vehicles.

Promote the development of solar and wind farms, especially in areas of the nation with lower environmental impacts. So some birds die. The benefits outweigh the risks.

Study Geothermal technologies from Iceland and the possibilities of developing them in places like California and the Pacific Northwest.

Increase research into Nuclear Fusion.

Finally, subsidize new oil companies that build refineries that can efficiently use Alaskan oil. It's a disgrace that 90% of Alaska's current oil production is shipped overseas because our own refineries aren't equipped to process it.

I think I would start mandating new building construction have the roofs covered with photovoltaic cells and existing buildings be retrofitted within 10 years. If one uses their energy wisely, one could wind up getting paid by the electric utility for producing more energy than consumed.
Not with my badass computer. Besides, I had always favored growing grass or a small garden on my roof.

1. I would buy some very nasty steel toe boots with spikes sticking out of them.

2. I would walk around and kick every person who owns an SUV in the nuts.

1. I would buy some very nasty steel toe boots with spikes sticking out of them.

2. I would walk around and kick every person who owns an SUV in the nuts.

YAY! :D

Nuclear power is the way to go. We should start building the plants now. It will pay huge dividends in the long run.

I'd also ban private jets. But that's really just because I hate the kennedys. It has nothing to do with the energy problem.

Nuclear power is the way to go. We should start building the plants now. It will pay huge dividends in the long run.

I'd also ban private jets. But that's really just because I hate the kennedys. It has nothing to do with the energy problem.

No, don't ban private jets! Private jets are cool man!

1. I would buy some very nasty steel toe boots with spikes sticking out of them.

2. I would walk around and kick every person who owns an SUV in the nuts.
That's discrimatory, since only men have nuts. You should kick teh region between there legs.

I'd offer tax incentives for the construction of nuclear power plants, and come down hard upon all those twats who try and protest them. Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were caused by the idiots in charge (In fact, the tossers running 3 Mile did everything within their power to cause a meltdown, and still didn't manage anything) and Soviet "design" (The Soviets talent with nuclear technology was roughly akin to a four year old's talent with his dad's shotgun) flaws.
After that, I'd remove government interference in energy markets. Eventually, gas will become expensive enough that Bio-fuel/electric/solar powered cars are economically superior (much like hybrids are blooming into the market).

I'm afraid most of you just don't get it. What the oil markets are telling us right now is that we simply are not going to be able to live this way for much longer. The answer is not to find some magic fairy dust that will solve all of our energy needs. We need to change the way we live.

The first thing I would do is rehabilitate of railroad track that's still in the ground. Then I would build new ones. Lots of them. As many as I could. I'd incourage private enterprises to build local and regional trade routes on them.

We need to rebuild our local economies. Peak oil will probably end globalism and we're gonna have to relearn how to produce goods and services and even food on a local and regional scale. There's not gonna be some magic elixer that comes along and allows us to continue consuming like there's no tomorrow. As Kunstler puts it, "The days of the 3,000 mile ceaser salad are over."

We're gonna need railroads and we don't really have very many. We're going to need manufacturing capacity and we've moved all that to China. we don't make very much of anything here anymore except advertisments and cheeseburgers. Each year we produce less. The same is true in Europe and even Japan.

It's not about trying to find a way to maintain and continually grow our energy and resource consumption. We all knew in our hearts this time would come. Our world is a finite place with laws that cannot be broken. Nothing at all that I am aware of in this universe can continually grow without eventually collapsing. We're about to slide down teh backside of world oil production and the only thing we can do is try to keep the ride from being to bumpy.

We just need to consume less. No other action can mean anywhere near as much.

Vegetarianistica']hydrogen cells. clean, no moving parts required.

but where are we going to get all that hydrogen from?

I would push for tax incentives for conservation techniques for private home owners, property renters and public business buidings. Such techniques will include solid state lighting, flourescentsand increased insulation. Tax breaks for such personal energy techologies such as solar and wind. Research grants and subsidies for developing Thermal depolymerization as a sewage treatment and a garbage-to-energy solution in major U.S. cities. Tax breaks for individuals that purchase hybrids and other fuel efficient vehicles.

Promote the development of solar and wind farms, especially in areas of the nation with lower environmental impacts. So some birds die. The benefits outweigh the risks.

Study Geothermal technologies from Iceland and the possibilities of developing them in places like California and the Pacific Northwest.

Increase research into Nuclear Fusion.

Finally, subsidize new oil companies that build refineries that can efficiently use Alaskan oil. It's a disgrace that 90% of Alaska's current oil production is shipped overseas because our own refineries aren't equipped to process it.
I agree with this. In the late '70's anything you would do to save energy came right off the top of your taxes. Everybody in the country was putting in insulation, passive solar panels, tankless water heaters, energy storing floors, solar adjusted roof overhangs, ethanol fuel, everything that can be imagined. All of the technology was available 25 years ago, we don't need to develop it, we don't need to study it. We need to take it off the shelf.

Then came Reagan and his oil VP. In the name of "tax reform" (ie. he said he would make taxes easier to understand, that's why they are so easy to understand today.) all tax incentives for energy conservation were cut totally out of the budget. Instantly, all energy conservation disappeared. Just think, if every house and car built in the last 25 years was built with energy saving technology available 25 years ago, the middle east would just be another region of the world. One man can make a huge difference even after he's dead.

Schrandtopia']but where are we going to get all that hydrogen from?

Someone please tell me that was sarcasm. Please.

I'd offer tax incentives for the construction of nuclear power plants, and come down hard upon all those twats who try and protest them. Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were caused by the idiots in charge (In fact, the tossers running 3 Mile did everything within their power to cause a meltdown, and still didn't manage anything) and Soviet "design" (The Soviets talent with nuclear technology was roughly akin to a four year old's talent with his dad's shotgun) flaws.
After that, I'd remove government interference in energy markets. Eventually, gas will become expensive enough that Bio-fuel/electric/solar powered cars are economically superior (much like hybrids are blooming into the market).
I don't get it. Which part was funny?

Accually, I'd just ignore the protestors and do pretty much the same.

Subsidize nuclear plants. Many nuclear plants.

Tax breaks for cars that run on electricity(the large number of nuclear plants would bring cheaper electricity, hopefully).

Make really harsh tax penalties for owning SUV's, and similar gas guzzlers.

Nuke zimbabwe.

Subsidize nuclear plants. Many nuclear plants.

Tax breaks for cars that run on electricity(the large number of nuclear plants would bring cheaper electricity, hopefully).

Make really harsh tax penalties for owning SUV's, and similar gas guzzlers.

Nuke zimbabwe.
Why Zimbabwe?

Solar power. It's free, once you build the cells, and by the time it runs out the earth will be uninhabitable.

Solar power. It's free, once you build the cells, and by the time it runs out the earth will be uninhabitable.
But it only works when the sun is shining (just when you need it the least), becuase man hasn't invented the battery yet.

But it only works when the sun is shining (just when you need it the least), becuase man hasn't invented the battery yet.

Hey, you're pretty funny.

well it's not a matter of banning anything or imposining royal fiat's, there's only so much can be done that way and sometimes it backfires and has the opposite effect. i would i think try to impose a 200% or 300% tax on motor fules at the retail and motor carrier pump. then plowing those revinues streight into alternative energy development. energy providers would be taxed on a sliding scale inversly proportional to how much the generate or purchase from cleaner (read noncombustion) sources.

there's a lot too that can be done about what gets romantacized and what doesn't. i'd do everything to DEromantacize the private passinger automobile. simply debunking a few of the myths popularly romantacezed about them would go a long way toward doing that.

then there are the defacto subsidies, like building and maintaining superhighways and even the frequency of repaving city streets.

no one can say what WILL happen but these are my policies as to what to push for and what to oppose.

alternative energy developers need tax breaks and subsidies, big oil doesn't.

that's where my main thrust would be. i might throw nuclear the occasional bone but i wouldn't expect so much of it as too many people, i think, have been brainwashed into.

forest practices and wildlife habitate and indiginous sacred site protections all need closer scrutiny and better support.

i'd continue to encourage people to look for ways to consume less energy, but i wouldn't expect that to carry the day.

i'd also have to have team members looking for ways of accompleshing these things without stepping on so many toes as to loose any and all support. i think that's been the real challange for anyone in or seeking public office to deal with the problem.

i can think of a lot of other odds and ends, the details of which would be beyond the scope of what there is room for in a reply here.

things that may seem simple and not at first obviously related, like putting closed circuit moniters on trains and busses that let passingers have a drivers eye view of the right of way ahead, which i really believe is one of the hidden real reasons for the automobile's popularity.

i would explore new tecnologies and new ways of making old tecnologies more energy effecient, but a relatively old, nearly forgotten and often discredited tecnology that could play a major roll is flanged wheel on steel rail, but solar charged, battery powered, intelligent (i.e. computer) dispatched, and built to compact and energy efficient proportions.

and the investment formerly made in subsidising the automobile with streets and roads could and would be very effectively reinvested in making everyplace more pedestrian friendly. that includes a LOT more public places to just stop and rest your feet a while along the way.

really the big picture is made up of a lot of little pictures, and in many ways it is these that are being paid far too little attention to.

=^^=
.../\...

A lot of what I'll say has already been said by people, so this will mostly be a compendium of what they've said.

Give tax breaks to people who install solar panels and/or hydroelectric generators on their houses and/or wind turbines on their property.
Promote new development of solar, wind, and hydroelectric technologies.
Increase funding for public transit while gradually banning cars.
Legalize industrial hemp and harvest the ethanol from it and from other sources, such as from when they make beer.
Promote the development of alternative technology that hasn't been mentioned here.
Once we've got a surplus of energy, we can start eliminating the nuclear plants, as well.

::snip::

Alright you dirty hippie. Consume less? You are typing from a goddamn computer in Los Angeles. Pull your head out of your ass. If oil runs out and we still havn't done anything to remedy our dependence on it how long do you think it will be before the bombs start falling? Worse case is not the collapse of shit it is the rise of a massive world energy war that will simply shift power around and kill lots of people to steal what they have.

In the world of reality mother is the necessity of invention. People will find a way to power all their cool stuff oil or no oil. Granted it is possible it won't be America leading the pack anymore but someone will be the mass consumer. It is whoever can either harness all the existing power supplies for themselves or become dependent of it first.

Why Zimbabwe?

Why not?

mother is the necessity of invention.

You win at life.

I agree with this. In the late '70's anything you would do to save energy came right off the top of your taxes. Everybody in the country was putting in insulation, passive solar panels, tankless water heaters, energy storing floors, solar adjusted roof overhangs, ethanol fuel, everything that can be imagined. All of the technology was available 25 years ago, we don't need to develop it, we don't need to study it. We need to take it off the shelf.

Then came Reagan and his oil VP. In the name of "tax reform" (ie. he said he would make taxes easier to understand, that's why they are so easy to understand today.) all tax incentives for energy conservation were cut totally out of the budget. Instantly, all energy conservation disappeared. Just think, if every house and car built in the last 25 years was built with energy saving technology available 25 years ago, the middle east would just be another region of the world. One man can make a huge difference even after he's dead.
The Energy tax break was possibly the single best thing Carter ever did, and eliminating it was possibly the single worst thing Reagan ever did.

You win at life.

I hear that so often I'm desensitized to it now. But thanks, I'll feign a smile for all the little people out there.

Alright you dirty hippie. Consume less? You are typing from a goddamn computer in Los Angeles. Pull your head out of your ass. If oil runs out and we still havn't done anything to remedy our dependence on it how long do you think it will be before the bombs start falling? Worse case is not the collapse of shit it is the rise of a massive world energy war that will simply shift power around and kill lots of people to steal what they have. Aside from the dirty hippie comment I agree with everything you said.

In the world of reality mother is the necessity of invention. People will find a way to power all their cool stuff oil or no oil. Granted it is possible it won't be America leading the pack anymore but someone will be the mass consumer. It is whoever can either harness all the existing power supplies for themselves or become dependent of it first.
Here's where we part company. I agree that people will of course use what is available to them, but I don't think what is available will allow anywhere near the standard of living we have enjoyed during the Age Of Oil. I study energy everyday and I am aware of all the proposals out there to fix teh coming energy crisis oil scarcity portends and I have not seen one single proposal that will still allow us to all hop in our cars at a moment notice and drive miles and miles to get our food or to go to work or whatever.

We need to rebuild our local economies. Peak oil will probably end globalism and we're gonna have to relearn how to produce goods and services and even food on a local and regional scale. There's not gonna be some magic elixer that comes along and allows us to continue consuming like there's no tomorrow. As Kunstler puts it, "The days of the 3,000 mile ceaser salad are over."

I doubt it. There was a period of globalisation long before the beginning of the oil era - clipper ships, mass immigration. Even a Victorian fom of the 'internet' - that is the 'telegraph'.

Today, about 90 to 95% or world trade comes by sea (www.shippingfacts.com) and they are relatively environmentally friendly * and the fuel costs are relatively small. The biggest costs in running a ship come from two main areas - crewing costs & associated 'necessaries' and the costs of paying back the ship mortgage (a Capesize vessel - basically a great big tin bath that can carry 170,000 tonnes of dry cargo like grain or iron ore) will set you back something like $60M to $70M in today's prices. You generally don't make money in shipping from trading, you make it from paying down the debt and waiting for a fluctuation in the asset (i.e. ship prices). Fuel doesn't come anywhere near the cost of capital and crew. And, it's owing to the advances in container ships - they now carry just under 10,000TEU - that's equivalent to about 5,000 trucks - that globalisation has taken place. If you buy a 3,000 mile cesar salad, the transportation costs are mere pennies. And ships are powered by 'bunker fuel' basically, something akin to tar (if bunker fuel cools down, it sets and you can walk on it!). Today, german ship operators are experimenting with great big kites attached to the front of the ships which may reduce fuel consumption by up to 20%. Add in developments in fuel cell technology, alternative forms of power generation on board at sea (step forward windpower for electricity generation) and it seems doubtful that the peak-oil society (which is undoubtedly coming) will end globalisation.

* if you ignore the nitrous oxide and sulfur oxide and evil cancer causing particulate matter in fuel. But that could be relatively easily cleaned up by mandating the use of better quality fuel and the introduction of appropriate technology

We just need to consume less. No other action can mean anywhere near as much.


I do agree with this. We can, and should, and could consume a whole lot less without imperilling society. All that wasted packaging springs to mind. Building devices that go on 'standby' w/o getting turned off is another. Leaving the lights on and the heating on in empty rooms is a third.

As a free-marketeer, I wouldn't do anything bar ...

Create carbon and emissions trading quota schemes
Re-internalise the externalities of pollution and climate change. That would probably mean a tax on energy use and carbon output.

Apart from that, I'd leave it to the market. It will get to the right answer, far more cheaply, long before I would :D

CDA

Let's just pretend for a moment that you are the President of your country. Let's say that the oil shortage crisis is on the horizon. You got to find an alternative fuel for your country before everything goes to hell in a handbasket. So how would you adjust your country's economy and way of life to alternative fuels? Which alternative fuel would you use, and how soon do you think you could impliment it nationwide?

For my country the United States, I would do the following.

First, I would get rid of the oil company's monopoloy on the energy market. Then I would give a governmental contract to a company that could mass-produce Bio-Fuel. The Bio-Fuel can either come from plants, or from trash such as stated in this article. I would prefer the second option, because it would also solve the USA waste problem.

http://www.discover.com/issues/jul-04/features/anything-into-oil/

Hopefully, these companies are able to sell their oil in major cities. I also hope that the oil prices for the Bio-Fuel would be cheaper than organic oil. Hopefully, the market will favor the Bio-Fuel companies and let them take over. I think this would take anywhere from 10 years to 20 years. I would try to keep the government out of it as much as possible. However, if the market refuse to adjust to Bio-Fuel, then I would give it a little nudge.

Now share your plans!

Blow up America. Then there'll be enough fuel to last a good long while.

NB, not really blow up America. Honest. HONEST.

I think I would start mandating new building construction have the roofs covered with photovoltaic cells and existing buildings be retrofitted within 10 years.great idea, that way you will drive prices for new construction up that much, that poor people can no longer afford living space and those, who already have a house will either have to borrow money to finance the refit or they will just lose their house.

i would do this:

1) allow to build new nuclear plants
2) designate a permanent disposal site for the nuclear waste
3) get rid of all the environmental regulations, that make building refineries and powerplants expensive and take forever
4) eliminate the law, that obligates powercompanies to buy solar- and windenergy at above marketprice.
5) eliminate the "ecotax", gastaxes and taxes on mineral oil
6) remove the requirements for the composition of petrol


i am convinced doing all of this would result in an immediate drop of price for gas from $10 per gallon to $1 per gallon and for electricity from 20cent/kWh to 3cent/kWh.

As a free-marketeer, I wouldn't do anything bar ...

Create carbon and emissions trading quota schemes
Re-internalise the externalities of pollution and climate change. That would probably mean a tax on energy use and carbon output.

Apart from that, I'd leave it to the market. It will get to the right answer, far more cheaply, long before I would :D

CDA
i was going to go into a whole thing about the definition of globalism, but I don't feel like it and it's all so semantic that it's like defining pornography. Suffice it to say that when I talk about globalism I am talking about a system whereby a mineral is mined in one part of the world, shipped to another where it is turned into a metal or other industrial material, shipped again and turned into a part, shipped again and turned into a part of a part, shipped again and turned into a part of a part of a part etc... By the time this is all doen that one piece of material may have crossed the globe several times. I don't think cheap oil will be the end of shipping, but realize two things.

1. The cost of the fuel is nothing. Now. That's the whole point. After Peak Oil that will probably no longer be true.

2. The cost of the fuel needed to run the ship is only one factor in the fueld equation. Now I've never studied ship building, but I do know that the manufacture of one car uses about as much oil as that car will burn in it's lifetime. Do you know how much oil it takes to build a ship?

I do agree that we need the market to solve these problems, but I think we may not be happy with the market's solutions. I'm sure they'll be better than the alternatives, though. But I am not so capitalist that I do not see a role for government. It is a settled point that rail tranport is much more efficient than road transport. It's very hard to get private enterprise to build rail, but would probably be very easy to get them to use rail that has been laid. I think the government does have a place in building infrastructure and I think rail is the first palce to start.

ill just have my people close their eyes and repeat "there is no problem" for the first and last 30 minutes of their day

Energy Plan of Amazingness (for Britain)

- 40% Nuclear
- 40% "Clean Coal"
- 10% North Sea Coal-Gasification Gas
- 10% Renewables (just to keep the eco-maniacs happy - they're actually useless and I doubt it would ever reach 10%)

Now this needs:

+ Funding for nuclear research. No selling Westinghouse.
+ Investment into coal gasification.
+ Get rid of regulation, tax on powerstations and ecological laws.

Probably the most important single gesture, would be hitting the oil-for-cars industry.

First solution then, would be instituting air-powered cars. The technology has been around for something like a century and a quarter, but it keeps getting pushed off the table somehow...

http://www.theaircar.com/

"With the incorporation of bi-energy (compressed air + fuel) the CAT Vehicles have increased their driving range to close to 2000 km with zero pollution in cities and considerably reduced pollution outside urban areas".

(Note: the 'fuel' in the bi-energy model need not be petroleum fuels...)

But it only works when the sun is shining (just when you need it the least), becuase man hasn't invented the battery yet.This is where the hydrogen comes in. When you have excess solar, (say in Arizona) use that energy to produce hydrogen. The hydrogen can then be shipped or piped to where it can be used or when the sun goes down it can be converted back to electricity. Yes I know there will be a loss at each step, but since you are starting out with virtually free, you can afford a loss from sun to hydrogen and then back to electricity. In the beginning, the average person will not use hydrogen because of a lack of infrastructure. But, it could easily be used as a source for an individual building such as a factory. Then over time it's use would expand.

Also read something about putting solar panels on roofs of hybrid cars. Then as they set in parking lots they recharge. If I remember correctly, a 50 minute commute to an 8 hr daytime job on a sunny day would be free of additional energy.

I installed a tankless water heater 5 years ago. Cost about twice that of a tank system. Totally paid for with saved gas in 1 1/2 years. The first tankless system I saw was 25 years ago in a house constructed to be 90% energy efficient. How many on this forum have even heard of a tankless system?

The point is, the technology was all developed over 25 years ago. It's just waiting for a leader that is serious about the children rather than the fat cats.

Well, my two main solutions would be nuclear and hydrogen - my two main sources of energy that is. I did a presentation on the advantages of hydrogen fuel cells and stuff a few weeks ago, and they seriously rock - its completely clean (the only by product is water) and... well, I won't try to summarise an entire presentation in one post, but even some basic research can give you a decent idea on how good they are - just google hydrogen fuel cells.

But yeah - they can power cars, houses and so forth, however they are pretty pricey at current technology levels - no doubt at some point we'll develop more cost effective ones, but at the moment, yeah.

But even so, to take some of the strain - like the major, national grid style power plants and things, I'm thinking nuclear - again, clean, long lasting etc etc. However, nuclear waste? Pfft - just build a huge catapult (ok, somewhat oversimplified but you know what I mean) and launch it into space, Sputnik styley - and I'm being serious. Say if you launch it at the Sun, what possible damage could that do? Incidentally, living in England as I do, I think I'm right in saying that Blair is mulling over whether or not to create a whole new load of nukes - why not use the material there to power the power plants? A much better use.

I'd stick a whole bunch of research grants etc etc into fusion - that, I believe, is the real way forward. As for wind, solar etc... hmm. I'm thinking they'd be a good interim solution while the hydrogen facilities are being created.

Well, my two main solutions would be nuclear and hydrogen - my two main sources of energy that is. I did a presentation on the advantages of hydrogen fuel cells and stuff a few weeks ago, and they seriously rock - its completely clean (the only by product is water) and... well, I won't try to summarise an entire presentation in one post, but even some basic research can give you a decent idea on how good they are - just google hydrogen fuel cells.

But yeah - they can power cars, houses and so forth, however they are pretty pricey at current technology levels - no doubt at some point we'll develop more cost effective ones, but at the moment, yeah.

But even so, to take some of the strain - like the major, national grid style power plants and things, I'm thinking nuclear - again, clean, long lasting etc etc. However, nuclear waste? Pfft - just build a huge catapult (ok, somewhat oversimplified but you know what I mean) and launch it into space, Sputnik styley - and I'm being serious. Say if you launch it at the Sun, what possible damage could that do? Incidentally, living in England as I do, I think I'm right in saying that Blair is mulling over whether or not to create a whole new load of nukes - why not use the material there to power the power plants? A much better use.

I'd stick a whole bunch of research grants etc etc into fusion - that, I believe, is the real way forward. As for wind, solar etc... hmm. I'm thinking they'd be a good interim solution while the hydrogen facilities are being created.
Where do you propose we get the hydrogen?

things that may seem simple and not at first obviously related, like putting closed circuit moniters on trains and busses that let passingers have a drivers eye view of the right of way ahead, which i really believe is one of the hidden real reasons for the automobile's popularity.
I think the reason I like the automobile so much is if it takes me 20 minutes to drive there if will take about an hour to get there on public transit (longer on sundays).


Why not?
HMMM. You have given me much to think about.... *ponders*

SNIP^2
I was just poking fun at one of NS's issues, but thanks for the info anyways:). Also, I think you may be wrong about the average person not being able to use hydrogen. My provincial government has already started building the infrastructure for a conversion to hydrogen powered cars. They are starting in a quite wealthy area (Whistler) because a) they will be able to afford hydrogen cars and b) it makes it really easy to get the public to support it (they say it is for the Olympics and people shut up about it).

Also, I think you may be wrong about the average person not being able to use hydrogen. My provincial government has already started building the infrastructure for a conversion to hydrogen powered cars. They are starting in a quite wealthy area (Whistler) because a) they will be able to afford hydrogen cars and b) it makes it really easy to get the public to support it (they say it is for the Olympics and people shut up about it).I'll ask you, too. Where do you plan to get the hydrogen?

Where do you propose we get the hydrogen?

Well, since you've asked that several times I'm assuming you're not joking. Which isn't such a good thing in many ways. Ok, I'll explain, and please don't misunderstand me if this sounds patronising - I'm just making it simple, I don't mean to be insulting.

1) The surface of the Earth is about 70% water.
2) The chemical formula for water is H20 (you'll have to excuse the lack of subscript)
3) H, as you probably know, is hydrogen, so that's two hydrogen atoms for every molecule of water.
4) Molecules are very small, and there is a whole heap of water - that is an awful lot of hydrogen atoms right there in the sea, in a river, anywhere.
5) Getting it out of the water is easy as pie - simple electrolysis of water. Most fuel cell stacks come with an electrolysis device attached.
6) Better still, you then have hydrogen and oxygen, which are the two things needed to power the fuel cell itself, creating electricity. Bingo. Problem solved.

I'll ask you, too. Where do you plan to get the hydrogen?
IIRC, we have enough hydroelectric power to create seperate water into oxygen and hydrogen.

IIRC, we have enough hydroelectric power to create seperate water into oxygen and hydrogen.
So you're not already using that electricity to power your homes and businesses? What percentage is your power running at at peak? 95%? 98%? Is there going to be enough left over to power the absolutely massive amount of power you'll need to run a hydrogen economy?

So you're not already using that electricity to power your homes and businesses? What percentage is your power running at at peak? 95%? 98%? Is there going to be enough left over to power the absolutely massive amount of power you'll need to run a hydrogen economy?

The power required to artificially light a photovoltaic cell to give it sufficient power to electrolyse water is significantly less than the power you get out of the fuel cell, so once you get it started (say a sunny day) it basically power itself, and still produce significant amounts of power. of course, that's ruling out the use of natural solar power (which is absurd :))

Well, since you've asked that several times I'm assuming you're not joking. Which isn't such a good thing in many ways. Ok, I'll explain, and please don't misunderstand me if this sounds patronising - I'm just making it simple, I don't mean to be insulting.

1) The surface of the Earth is about 70% water.
2) The chemical formula for water is H20 (you'll have to excuse the lack of subscript)
3) H, as you probably know, is hydrogen, so that's two hydrogen atoms for every molecule of water.
4) Molecules are very small, and there is a whole heap of water - that is an awful lot of hydrogen atoms right there in the sea, in a river, anywhere.
5) Getting it out of the water is easy as pie - simple electrolysis of water. Most fuel cell stacks come with an electrolysis device attached.
6) Better still, you then have hydrogen and oxygen, which are the two things needed to power the fuel cell itself, creating electricity. Bingo. Problem solved.


In reality the majority of the hydrogen used in fuel cells comes from non-renewable natural gas as this is the cheapest way. To produce it from water is, as you say, a well known process and the amount of water required is small; interestingly the requirement for the entire US light-duty fleet (over 200 million vehicles) would require about 310 billion US gallons of water a year, slightly more than is used by the oil refinery business at the moment (figures from fuelcellsworks.com). The main problem is the electricity for the electrolysis.

Ultimately to make a reasonable amount of energy from hydrogen you will need a lot more energy going in.

The power required to artificially light a photovoltaic cell to give it sufficient power to electrolyse water is significantly less than the power you get out of the fuel cell, so once you get it started (say a sunny day) it basically power itself, and still produce significant amounts of power. of course, that's ruling out the use of natural solar power (which is absurd :))
How's that going to scale up? There are 200,000,000 cars in North America. 750,000,000 cars in the world. You need to generate enough hydrogen/ day to replace about 75 million barrels of oil used per day in world transportation. I'll need all aspects of the plan. Where do you get the water from? How much will you need? How will you transport it? Where will you get the additional electricity? Is the water availabel and will there be any left over for farming, industry, domestic use?

You can probably tell by now that I am very dubious about a hydrogen economy. Generally speaking it takes much more energy to generate the hydrogen than you get from it. Hydrogen is not a primary energy form, it is an energy carrier - more like a battery than an oil well. If you're talking about generating hydrogen by using photovolcaics, where do you get the materials needed to make all those panels? Where do you get the energy needed to mine all those materials? Currently photovolcaics are made from rare minerals and plastics (oil). If you don't want to use oil anymore, what's your replacement?

As we all know, America has a few problems. There is an epidemic of obesity, lots of pollution, undisciplined children, and an energy crisis. I, however, have a key to fixing all four - AT ONCE.

We build giant warehouses all across the US - really big ones. Then we make giant hamster wheels - hundreds for each complex. Then we have obese people and hyperactive children run in them all day, getting breaks and such, until they're tired out and in shape. The wheels are connected to a generator which will generate electricity. Bingo! Clean, cheap power, healthy people, and children that will be too tired to have ADD. We'll save billions on Ritalin alone, maybe even cure cancer with the funds. We could even offer tax incentives to get people to run on them.

So you're not already using that electricity to power your homes and businesses? What percentage is your power running at at peak? 95%? 98%? Is there going to be enough left over to power the absolutely massive amount of power you'll need to run a hydrogen economy?
It was been mentioned already that they have to be able to reduce their production down to about 60-70% in the summer to prevent overheating, in the winter we could run them close to 100% and store hydrogen for the summer. Plus we sell alot of power across the border, and if this energy shortage is going to be as bad as everyone thinks, I doubt people will want the government selling it to another country.

The power required to artificially light a photovoltaic cell to give it sufficient power to electrolyse water is significantly less than the power you get out of the fuel cell, so once you get it started (say a sunny day) it basically power itself, and still produce significant amounts of power. of course, that's ruling out the use of natural solar power (which is absurd :))
Someone hasn't heard of the laws of Thermodynamics.

First off let me say the reason we are in this mess is because we did not learn our lesson in the 70's. :headbang: Now we have to be smarter than our parents and in some cases grandparents, we have to fix this problem not kick it down to the next group of kids to come along.

1) Up the taxes on gas hogs at the manufactures and at the pump. If you don't work on a farm odds are you do not need a V-8.

2) Mass Transit make it more appealing by, putting a "user fee" on city streets and make certain streets pedestrians/bikes only. Granted this will only work in larger cities because smaller cities are to spread out.

3) Railroads, used to every town worth it's salt had a rail yard for the loading and unloading of goods and people.

4) New zoning laws on Houses. Put a max size on new homes, think of all that energy wasted to heat all those rooms that people have just to have. Mandate energy ratings for all new homes using solar power where possible.

5) Alt fuels for cars the trouble here is no one (us the customer) will buy the cars because you can't get the fuel for them so no one (the car companies) will make the cars because no one will buy them. No one will open fuel stations for them because no one drives the damn things because you can't get fuel for them. So the Government will built the first round of fuel stations just to get the ball rolling and after its rolling along will sale them to the public.

6) Nuclear Power yes please and lots of it. Send the waste in to the Sun or out into space. Just don't build the things on the fault lines.

7) I know this one sounds silly but encourage the hippies to be more "hippyish" in other words give tax breaks to people use renewable forms of energy at home and at work. The less they use the more we have to do R&D with.

8) This will be my last point. Stated simply as do more R&D.

I know most of the points I have made are based on conservation but that is truly where it has to start.

As we all know, America has a few problems. There is an epidemic of obesity, lots of pollution, undisciplined children, and an energy crisis. I, however, have a key to fixing all four - AT ONCE.

We build giant warehouses all across the US - really big ones. Then we make giant hamster wheels - hundreds for each complex. Then we have obese people and hyperactive children run in them all day, getting breaks and such, until they're tired out and in shape. The wheels are connected to a generator which will generate electricity. Bingo! Clean, cheap power, healthy people, and children that will be too tired to have ADD. We'll save billions on Ritalin alone, maybe even cure cancer with the funds. We could even offer tax incentives to get people to run on them.

By god! I like it!

Ah, Discover.

Have you seen the latest issue, with the article titled "The Energizer"?

After reading the article and being presented a question like this, I'd simply bring the power plants to the people. Every person would own their own windmills and solar cells and at a small fee buy another cell or windmill to increase their power.

Of course it might be hard to have a set of windmills and solar cells if you live in a cramped apartment complex, so land can be zoned for the sole purpose of housing the generators.

The only bill the people will get is a bill concerning the amount of land they've rented from the government.

The people pay less for power, the government pays less to sustain that power, and overall everyone else except for the big oil barons are happy.

Schrandtopia']I second the nuke proposal

we can use that action to generate hydrogen for our cars (I know its less practical but it could work)

There is a much more limmited supply of uranium than there is of oil.

I would completely deregulate and privatize the energy industry, make it easier for communities to sue polluters who damage their property to ensure polution doesn't get out of control. I'd let the private sector find temporary solutions while redirecting research grants into a supercomputer that can fully simulate living organisms and the effects of genetic manipulation. That would be a major step into being able to design organisms that can produce fuel and other things.

or just the first part.

Hmmm.....
I'd probably go in and fix gas prices for a while, to cut down on the demand...
Then I'd probably start handing out grants to companies that can develop efficient use of fuel cells and bio-diesel.
To ease the switch I'd probably phase out gasoline-powered automobiles over a 25-year period, giving tax credits to those who do it sooner rather than later.

I would resurrect the CEGB with a full spectrum of absolute powers, and let them build nukes and onshore/offshore windfarms wherever they see fit.

Another really good place to start is with cats and buttered toast. I read somewhere once where this had been proposed and is actually working in some European labs. Everyone knows that cats always land on their feet. Everyone also knows that toast always lands butter side down. Well, if you were to tie buttered toast onto the backs of millions of cats and then throw them up into the air they will just sit there and spin because of the mutually repulsing forces. You can use the spinnning cats/buttered toasts to spin a generator. Millions of these cat/buttered toast generators could generate lots of electricity. This could even work to solve our transportation problems. I dont' know if anyone has tried this, but I think yoru could probably get the cat/buttered toast engine to spin the wheels of cars, too.

There is a much more limmited supply of uranium than there is of oil.


And the reaction mass required is much smaller.... relevence?

The Space Elevator will need to beprioritized also.

Why? Space-based solar power. With the aid of microwave transmission, Space-based solar can generate power all day, all night thanks to an unrestricted view of the sun. :)

I don't get it. Which part was funny?
Water is 2/3 hydrogen. That's a good place to start looking.

I would ban driving uphill. By driving exclusively downhill with the engine off would save a lot of fuel. To get back up you can push your car.

Two words:
Iron filings.

Seriously, powdered iron actually burns hotter than gasoline does. Also, the waste product is rust, which can be electrolyzed to produce O2 and iron again!

Source: New Scientist Magazine (major UK-based science news)

While we convert our engines to run on iron filings, I make solar roofing mandatory for ALL buildings, except for very historic ones. As President, I start it off by adding solar roofing to the White House and all the museums in DC.

Finally, take all the money we used to spend on oil, and use it for fuel cell/nuclear fusion research.

Result: US power supply runs on iron and sunlight, two things we have plenty of.

Oh, and all old ships get recycled for their iron.

Most important of all: Cut down on smog production BIG TIME. That is going to throw a wrench in our solar energy plans.

Two words:
Iron filings.

Seriously, powdered iron actually burns hotter than gasoline does. Also, the waste product is rust, which can be electrolyzed to produce O2 and iron again!

Source: New Scientist Magazine (major UK-based science news)

While we convert our engines to run on iron filings, I make solar roofing mandatory for ALL buildings, except for very historic ones. As President, I start it off by adding solar roofing to the White House and all the museums in DC.

Finally, take all the money we used to spend on oil, and use it for fuel cell/nuclear fusion research.

Result: US power supply runs on iron and sunlight, two things we have plenty of.

Oh, and all old ships get recycled for their iron.

Most important of all: Cut down on smog production BIG TIME. That is going to throw a wrench in our solar energy plans.

I still prefer the air-pressure car. Huge operating range, and the big waste product is totally reusable... i.e. the main 'waste product' is air.

I still prefer the air-pressure car. Huge operating range, and the big waste product is totally reusable... i.e. the main 'waste product' is air.
How efficient is it? I mean, what pressure do you have to achieve and how many km per litre of air at that pressure?

I still prefer the air-pressure car. Huge operating range, and the big waste product is totally reusable... i.e. the main 'waste product' is air.

Yes, and it doesn't make power systems engineers cry when you try and recharge it. Unlike electric cars.

How efficient is it? I mean, what pressure do you have to achieve and how many km per litre of air at that pressure?

I recall seeing statistics that suggest 300 psi (hence, the transfer system is carbon fibre, so it will shatter in crashes, rather than explode). I'm not sure about the km per litres value... although I can look into it. I've seen figures suggesting Texas to New York, on one refill of the bi-fuel design.

Two words:
Iron filings.

Seriously, powdered iron actually burns hotter than gasoline does. Also, the waste product is rust, which can be electrolyzed to produce O2 and iron again!

Source: New Scientist Magazine (major UK-based science news)

While we convert our engines to run on iron filings, I make solar roofing mandatory for ALL buildings, except for very historic ones. As President, I start it off by adding solar roofing to the White House and all the museums in DC.

Finally, take all the money we used to spend on oil, and use it for fuel cell/nuclear fusion research.

Result: US power supply runs on iron and sunlight, two things we have plenty of.

Oh, and all old ships get recycled for their iron.

Most important of all: Cut down on smog production BIG TIME. That is going to throw a wrench in our solar energy plans.

Small scale solar panels don't integrate into the power supply system.

There are a few places in the US where solar power can be used, but converting the entire country is a pipe dream.

Anway, there is a need to stop using/reduce oil right now, and renewables (despite the nearly forty years they have been 'just around the corner') still can't fill the gap.

I wish people would just accept the nuclear option, so we can get on with it.

Edit: and considering that you are 'burning' iron filings, you are going tohave a hell of a time building a durable engine.

I say ban all motorized pleasure craft - be it on water, on land, or in the air. We should be less cavalier in our use of internal combustion engines, or jets for that matter.

What's wrong with sailing instead of 'boating'? Riding instead of driving? Hang gliding or hot-air ballooning instead of tearing through the sky? Even snowcraft need to be repurposed as legitimate utility vehicles. And don't get me started on those horrid sea-doos.

Small scale solar panels don't integrate into the power supply system.

There are a few places in the US where solar power can be used, but converting the entire country is a pipe dream.

Anway, there is a need to stop using/reduce oil right now, and renewables (despite the nearly forty years they have been 'just around the corner') still can't fill the gap.

I wish people would just accept the nuclear option, so we can get on with it.

Edit: and considering that you are 'burning' iron filings, you are going tohave a hell of a time building a durable engine.

That's the other big advantage of the air-pressure car. No real heat build up, so MUCH better efficiency, AND you can make the enging parts out of something light, like aluminium (aluminum to all those foreigners...)

My solution? Enjoy it while it lasts. Because in 4 years, at the earliets... everythings going to start going downhill. By the time the ICBMs are arcing across the planet, it wont be my fault.