I am watching this video RIGHT NOW. I will comment on it later and this is a current event I think, because the youtube video was uploaded today and it is rather a new forum. Now the question is can renewable energy power the world and just as affordably as fossil fuel/nuclear? The conclusion is yes. But here's how it works and what the challenges are! Enjoy the video and I to make this more politically charged, just realize how buffoonish this video makes the Republican party look, claiming that it can't be done and can't be affordable. [video=youtube;e9NphOWdQz8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9NphOWdQz8[/video]
Do you have a transcript? I can't stand using video for information--video is for fun, IMHO, not serious endeavors. Germany is hardly an example. Electricity there costs more than 4 times what it does in the U.S. IMHO, that is NOT affordable.
Energy at four times the current cost is affordable? This certainly makes someone look buffoonish, but that someone isn't the Republican Party.
Germany is a great example. Petroleum used to be more expensive than Whale Oil...what's your point? Do you not understand how economies of scale and maturing technology works? - - - Updated - - - Remember when Whale oil was cheaper than Petroleum? I bet you looked stupid then too arguing for continued use of Whale oil and an end to Petroleum subsidies... Stop subsidizing New Jersey Standard Oil! went the cry from the ballyhooers!
Of course I'm being a little over-the-top regarding "Whale oil vs. Petroleum" but a better break down of the situation then is here: http://www.environmentalhistory.org/brilliant/bioenergy/the-whale-oil-myth/ The basis is that subsidies and taxation moved the market from whale oil to alternatives and inevitably a suitable scale was built that the subsidies paid off.
If God wanted man to use petroleum he would have put petroleum into animals or plants for man to harvest. By using petroleum man is going against the will of God and Gid will punish man for disobeying Gid,s will.
Eh not sure if you're being a parody or what, but I'll bite, because I'm bored. If you look at the way nature is staged on Earth, it does seem very conducive to technological advancement. We aren't just lucky that we have clays to make pots, or wood to burn as fuel, but we have...like as if in a video game different levels of progression. If we were on Mars, chances are there's no oil, so could never get past the Wood stage. There's no Uranium, so couldn't get to the Nuclear stage... And so on. Only earth has this perfect combination of ingredients to allow Humans to go from nothing to space faring
Ill be glad when fusion is finally workable and we can put all this energy (*)(*)(*)(*) behind us. As for now, I'm for using whatever is cheaper. Because the way I see it, the mining process for rare earth materials used in many renewables is just as bad, if not worse than using fossil fuels. I do find it funny when liberals use the power of economies of scale and other market based arguments when pushing green energy, but then beat their chests and turn red in the face when discussing the private sector economy, on almost any other issue.........
Fusion won't be possible, because fusion doesn't take place in stable environments. The idea that the Sun is driven by Fusion is likely a myth and a misapplication of nuclear physical concepts. Fusion can be achieved in a Nuclear bomb, that's about it. The Sun is increasingly evidenced to be a powerful anode in an electrical system. Not a nuclear fireball.
It amazes me, almost every time. - - - Updated - - - You have almost no clue what you are talking about.... http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html Hows 20 years sound to you?
Sounds like what they said 60 years ago. They are wrong now, just as they are wrong then. Because they are MISAPPLYING nuclear physical concepts based around an object they have incorrectly identified as a Nuclear Fusion bomb contained in a gravity field. The entire premise of Nuclear Fusion as a power source comes from the theoretical model of the Sun, which is increasingly proven to be ENTIRELY wrong.
That was a little before my time. Your "bet I looked stupid as I argued for it" fantasy is silly. It is as though you don't even know what century we are in. At any rate. We all knew you wouldn't be able defend your position.
Not necessarily. I just point out the massive hypocrisy and buffoonery on the right all too easy. - - - Updated - - - So you don't think Renewables will continue to cheapen as they reach economies of scale?
Not necessarily? So has someone hacked your account and posting pro Hillary comments without you knowing? And just double checking, you don't think the Sun is Fusion based, you think.....its a battery?
I think there's strong evidence it functions as an anode in an electrical system. To call it a battery is actually...well it proves your stupidity on the subject matter. A battery has a dielectric that allows it to have the functions of a capacitor. But anyway, there is mounting evidence the nuclear model of the sun is not tenable and that the more logical explanation is an electrical model, meaning it's a plasma ball and is not fusing heavier elements in its core. If you disagree, I have an entire thread on it in the science forums.
Yeah sorry Im not up on your armchair conspiracy science. As a real Scientist, I am always fascinated by facebook armchair scientists and the (*)(*)(*)(*) they come up with. Im asking you to explain your sun science in detail. Lets start with you telling us how the sun formed.
Yes, that is a popular claim for the flat earth set. Already, industry is working on cheaper and less environmentally problematic materials for batteries and solar than rare earth metals. Most batteries of all sorts are recycled now, as well.
You're not a real scientist. As is evidenced by your horse(*)(*)(*)(*) logic. Unfortunately for you, these "conspiracy scientists" actually present their arguments and evidence and present counter-arguments to the current model. You are free to debate their positions in the science thread. I don't have to tell you how the sun formed, to tell you that arguments such as (hotter corona than fusion core) and (accelerating particles in mass ejections) are theoretically consistent with an electrical system rather than a gravity system. I don't have to say how the sun formed to argue those things...want to try and explain how in a system that is controlled by gravity that particles accelerate? Like in a particle accelerator?
After reading your post / comments, I will pass, I have a degree in electronics, various certifications relating to electronic communications, an Amateur radio license, build radios as a hobby, etc......
Well then go to the science thread and debate it there. I'm not absolutely sold on the idea, but they are convincing in their argumentation and if that's the case then Fusion would never work as we conceive it. Also, I build generators/stators, I've built my own transformers and tinker with electrical equipment as a hobby as well so I dont really consider your qualifications as expert either...neither of us can comment authoritatively on the Electrical theory of the Sun. I just put it out there as it's highly convincing and probable.
Unlike you, I get paid and have been paid as a Scientist since the early 80s. You failed at the first remedial question as I expected. You know what the sun is but cant even tell us how it formed. Thanks for amusing me. I love facebook science crazies!
I'm not talking about ever, I'm talking about now. Eventually renewables will be affordable, I agree with that. I just disagree with you about how close we are to that point. Let me ask you a question--do you pay electric bills? There were no petroleum subsidies when petroleum took over from whale oil. It was the free market at work. The government used to just leave things like that alone. Please show evidence that Standard oil was subsidized. - - - Updated - - - Fusion won't be the panacea you think it will be. There are a lot of environmental hurdles to it. For example, the massive thermal pollution.
https://fee.org/articles/witch-hunting-for-robber-barons-the-standard-oil-story/ Well after I presented some more research earlier it was more apparent the oil industry was already taking off in an industry supported by the government long before petroleum was found. But Standard was given a monopoly by the government. - - - Updated - - - Aw it's so cute how you think because a theory isn't 100% fully developed that invalidates the theory. Goodbye Evolution. Meanwhile, your paid to be a scientist probably means you're a lab tech doing routine mundane (*)(*)(*)(*).
Hate to be the one to break it to you, but fusion has been accomplished several times outside of the nuclear bomb. The problem is sustained fusion that is containable. I'm not interested in if the sun works exactly as we have thought it has. I'm interested in what math, physics and chemistry tell us is achievable. And as long as we can contain the reaction, we can harness it. And when we harness it, the by products can be used to feed a greenhouse........
