14 Sep 08
Originally posted by sonhouseI agree in what you say. But what Iceland can do, also we can do.
It looks to me like a step-wise thing, first more efficient production of ethanol as a stop-gap measure to reduce our dependence on foreign oil then getting fusion going then using fusion, solar, etc., to make H2. The infrastructure is already in place for ethanol. Did you see my post about the bio-engineered bacteria that thrives at higher temps and conver ...[text shortened]... eans that much less that can go into research. Reduce that and more money will flow to research.
There are proposals for methanol, ethanol, methane and other systems, but this will only be for a while. We cannot use good agral areals to grow fuel when it's needed to grow food. To have cheap fuel we have to allow expencive food. Good for us, but devastating for the third world.
The ultimate goal for vehicular fuel is H2. Then we can talk about the energy needed to bring the H2 out of water. Iceland has its plan, so can we.
14 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasIt is a lot easier for places like Iceland to convert to H2 because they have a lot of geothermal energy just waiting to be tapped, that and a really small population. It's a matter of scale. Sure stuff can be done on a small scale like for Iceland, especially when they don't have to turn to Nuclear or Solar for power, they can just tap it out of the ground. It's a different story for places like China where there are 1 billion people all wanting to drive.
I agree in what you say. But what Iceland can do, also we can do.
There are proposals for methanol, ethanol, methane and other systems, but this will only be for a while. We cannot use good agral areals to grow fuel when it's needed to grow food. To have cheap fuel we have to allow expencive food. Good for us, but devastating for the third world.
Th ...[text shortened]... can talk about the energy needed to bring the H2 out of water. Iceland has its plan, so can we.
14 Sep 08
Originally posted by sonhouseTrue, Iceland has a population of 300 thousand. And they can do it! Then a country with a population of 300 million can do it, because they have resources of a factor of a thousand more. China, if they want to do it, have 20 fold more resources to do it.
It is a lot easier for places like Iceland to convert to H2 because they have a lot of geothermal energy just waiting to be tapped, that and a really small population. It's a matter of scale. Sure stuff can be done on a small scale like for Iceland, especially when they don't have to turn to Nuclear or Solar for power, they can just tap it out of the ground ...[text shortened]... different story for places like China where there are 1 billion people all wanting to drive.
Iceland has their geothermal energy, but anyone building a nuclear plant has also energy enough to bring H2 out of ordinary water. This is a matter of will, nothing more.
Then we have problems of various kinds, I don't deny this. But first and last, it's a matter of political will. Iceland has it.
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasYou are preaching to the choir here🙂
True, Iceland has a population of 300 thousand. And they can do it! Then a country with a population of 300 million can do it, because they have resources of a factor of a thousand more. China, if they want to do it, have 20 fold more resources to do it.
Iceland has their geothermal energy, but anyone building a nuclear plant has also energy enough to ...[text shortened]... kinds, I don't deny this. But first and last, it's a matter of political will. Iceland has it.
We both know that but it's the highly inertial governments that need to be kicked in the assumption to get things done!
15 Sep 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWell I was thinking about the possibility of needing a manhattan style research program, where the costs would be too much for a single company, like suppose something can be done they think, but it needs an input of 30 billion dollars to prove it? That kind of thing.
Governments? No.
Let the people do it. A lucky and capable few will get rich off it someday.
15 Sep 08
wow I certantly started a debate here...
definantly research is needed, and now I guess I understand that there is more to ethanol than simply corn products and stuff.
this will probably quickly move into a political debate, but...
The biggest problem with individual companies trying to do this is that the government gives them no room to breathe. We have become so fixed on taxing big business, that they have no incentive to reach out for something big like this. As someone said earliar: most companies would rather take the easy big bucks than dream big and either burn or go huge.
and as for a government project, it seems a little too comunistic. Not that it is always bad (though I think it's definantly not the right way to go), but there is little incentive for success, when you can eat a fat paycheck tredding water!
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by sonhouseI suspect that you don't need a Manhattan style Project if you're not terrified of your citizens having this technology.
Well I was thinking about the possibility of needing a manhattan style research program, where the costs would be too much for a single company, like suppose something can be done they think, but it needs an input of 30 billion dollars to prove it? That kind of thing.
I've made ethanol. It's not hard. Neither is distillation or any number of other techniques appropriate to the task at hand.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI was talking about the expense that will be needed for any of these newer technologies. There is work going on now to lower the cost of solar panels, right now riding at about a buck 70 a watt, that needs to come down to 50 cents or so to make it a viable industrial source but to do so means putting in the time and bucks to get there which is for sure a multi-billion dollar project.
I suspect that you don't need a Manhattan style Project if you're not terrified of your citizens having this technology.
I've made ethanol. It's not hard. Neither is distillation or any number of other techniques appropriate to the task at hand.
16 Sep 08
I think there's another factor to consider. In the capitalist world we live in today, a few mega-millionaire people have a lot of influence over policy and law making. Should we switch to any other energy source, these people would be affected, since some of them are rich because of petroleum.
I believe this is going to be a factor that will at least slow down the implementation of new technology and rid ourselves of the dependence of petroleum, especially in the US.