I'm going to put some ideas out here, and you tell me what you think. I know that many will not agree, but this could be a brainstorming thread where we can work together.

I hope that I am not the only one who recognizes that the American economy cannot run on fossil fuels much longer. How long until we see major problems I do not know.

I have thought about this, and I have made some ideas.

I think that each county or state must produce alternate energy. We have nuclear, solar, wind, hydroelectric, biofuel(manure), and probably others that I cannot think of off the top of my head.

What I am saying is that each area of the country should produce whatever is the most economically and environmentally feasible energy source FOR THAT LOCATION.

I want to stress the LOCAL part.

For example, if you live in a part of the country that rains a lot, then solar is a no go. So what else could we try? Nuclear? Wind? Biofuel?

On the same token, if you live in an area with dense forest and not a lot of wind, then maybe nuclear or biofuel might be good.

I am trying to stress that the location of the place that needs the energy is the determining factor of what will be used.

Another example if you live near a river or a body of water, then hydro-electricity might be more feasible, but wind or nuclear would not be.

This is about creating America that is self sustaining and not dependent on foreign fuel.

What do you think? Criticism is encouraged

I dunno. I don't think the problem is that people can sell excess electricity.

Or is it? I honestly don't know. Last time I looked at how the electrical market works (back when the electric company conspired to have Schwarzenegger elected or something), it gave me a real headache. It did seem bizarre.

Well I didn't even think of selling electricity back. Imagine that, houses having their own source of energy that could be distributed to other nearby houses and vise-versa. I wouldn't mind sharing excess electricity with my neighbors if I didn't need it.

I'm surprised no one has any other ideas or problems with my suggestions.

there is a template out there
brazil committed to becoming energy self sufficient
it achieved that national goal last year
only recently have there been preliminary discoveries of oil reserves which could potentially rival those of the saudis
in less than a decade brazil has gone from being near bankrupt to energy rich

PURPA is still on the books and requires the utilities to purchase - at the present commercial rate - surplus energy generated by its customers
undertaking hydro and nuclear projects would likely be too mammoth and complex for most communities and some states ... not even sure we should want government to be in the role of primary power generator
the cause and effect of higher gasoline/diesel prices has alreay motivated development of more efficient autos. in my area, traffic appears to be down ... substantially down during other than to/from work periods
for residential applications the biggest bang for the buck is preheating water using solar technology
the more expensive home fuels become the expense of solar collectors become more reasonable ...
commercial construction is becoming much more green than ever before
it would seem market forces are at work determining which alternatives - if any - are most cost effective, depending up the energy demands of each person, family, organization. so, rather than the government intruding itself and - its bureaucracy - in this process, an evolutionary process that will likely operate better without the limitations imposed by government, my preferred role for government - federal, state and local would be to stay the hell away

__________________

Quote:

"I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right."

Frank Zappa

Localised energy sources would be better. Instead of 1 grid you can have thousands of individual grids for suburbs. Also geothermal is kickass its the only source that doesn't require energy from outer space or wasting precious oil and coals.

__________________
Collective? I'm sure thats easy when your not surrounded by a bunch of (*)(*)(*)(*)ing retards!!!

Wow.. how lucky for me.

I was looking for a good place to ask opinionated people what their views, and those of their preferred candidates are regarding plug-in hybrid vehicles so that I could place those opinions on my new forum.

At first, it seemed I wasn't going to have much luck, as most of the talk here is fairly unscientific - as would be expected at a political forum, and me popping in to suddenly talk about my own forum would seem rather trollish.

Well, this thread turns out to be just what I was looking for. I know it's not talking about Nazis or abortion or gays, so will probably not get the same attention, but I'm looking for candid opinions from those who know a little about plug-in hybrids.

What are they, and how do they relate to this thread?

In a nutshell, think of a plug-in hybrid as an electric car with a fairly limited range, say, 40 miles, that you plug-in at night like a cell phone. If you drive less than that 40 miles each day (which almost everyone in the US does), you'll always run on electricity.

Now slap a Honda generator on the roof-rack to keep the batteries charged just in case you go on a long drive, exceeding the range the batteries can provide, and there you go: it's a car you can plug-in, and also a car that runs on gas if needed, hence 'hybrid'.

Back to this thread:

What does having this little portable power plant enable?

For one, it is perfectly happy to accept intermittent power sources like wind and PV solar to juice-up. It can actually power your house in case of a blackout, for quite some time. It allows the electric utility companies to keep their plants running around the clock - an advantage as you can't just flip these plants on and off. Plug-in hybrids can halt the construction of new gas-fired power plants that are designed to top-off the grid during peaks.

If you were in the electric-utility business, you'd say that these cars, which are just mobile batteries, are able to 'fill the valleys' and 'shave the peaks' in power demand - something that is a huge benefit.

Please let me know what you think about this.

I think that these vehicles should be an absolute priority because they solve so many of our current issues.

It's true, geothermal is kick ass. Like nucler, and tidal power, it is remnant energy from the formation of our solar system. Every other form of energy we can harvest comes from our sun.

There certainly is an abundance of geothermal energy: the US has many areas where vast quantities of heat are very close to the surface. Australia is particularly lucky, in that it has 'hot rocks'. Large underground structures that are like natural nuclear reactors, covered in insulating dirt. Tapping into these will allow the Aussies 75 years, at least, of completely emission-free power! (to run the entire country)

What you are talking about is called "net-metering". Although it caries state-by-state, in most places now, the utilities are required to buy back power you generate at home. The give a pretty crappy wholesale rate usually, but it's better than nothing, and you are making a difference to their CO2 output.

Germany is way ahead of the world when it comes to net-metering. Just google it and prepared to be shocked (no pun). Eventually it will be the norm here in North America - it's just a matter of political will and corporate willingness. All of the technological hurdles have been crossed.

These are great ideas!

So everyone here is saying that the technology to provide more efficient and cost effective energy sources is already here, but it needs more investment and time?

The school that I went to used geothermal energy to heat its water. In the winter it got free hot water. Isn't that amazing?

Also, near where I live, there are wind generators that are always spinning, and they power a small amount of local businesses and homes.

I also visited a power plant that burns garbage to generate electricity.

I do agree that the market will have to respond to these changes, but does anyone think that the market is near this transition phase?

the market responds to demand
as oil was both cheap and abundantly available there was no demand for alternatives
now that has changed we see an emphasis on finding alternatives
the gray hairs will remember when the first oil embargo occurred there ensued an emphasis on conservation and alternatives then, too. once oil resumed being plentiful and reasonably priced the emerging alternative energy industry died on the vine

__________________

Quote:

"I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right."

Frank Zappa