Discussion: Alternative Energy

OK its decided.
My number one concern over all else...war included, is energy.

I dont think some of you younger folks realize, that this is killing businesses and putting people out of work.

Here are a few thoughts
1) Lets say someone comes into power in OPEC and refuses to sell us oil?
This country will grind to a halt in about 45 days. Massive power plant outages, infrastructure will stop, you name it. 30 days into it, I can imagine people walking around with hoses to try to siphon gas from others...and of course, people will then be "shooting to kill"

Anyone that says we dont need Oil is plain stupid. Planes...busses...cars...farm equipment...power plants all run on oil to a large degree. Imagine all this stopping.

The new person in power MUST DRILL everywhere, responsibly, I sympathize with the environmentalists, but this country will DIE without it.

2) If we do become somewhat energy independent with oil or something else?
We are then, not answering to others. Others power over us ENDS. We went to Iraq for oil, Bush says its for their safety, and I believe he thinks that partially...but WE HAVE TO HAVE THE OIL. Eliminate that need from others, and bamn, we no longer need to answer to outside countries influence.

It's really too bad Iraq ever happened. It has stained all other real progress Bush has made. For example, Bush has done more for altnerative energy than all past presidents combined.

Not that it changes anything. I'm just saying...
 
Think how much further we could invest in these alternative technologies if we weren't spending billions monthly in Iraq?
 
Guys this has nothing to do with Iraq...the way things are now...Iraq or not, NOTHING would be different.
 
Guys this has nothing to do with Iraq...the way things are now...Iraq or not, NOTHING would be different.
That's right....because big oil would still be in control of the alternate technologies.
 
If the US wholeheartedly moved towards getting alternative power to foreign energy, in 15 years, this country would almost be self sufficient.
 
If the US wholeheartedly moved towards getting alternative power to foreign energy, in 15 years, this country would almost be self sufficient.

I have no doubt about that one. But we're still like that 40 year old guy who still lives in his parent's basement when it comes to energy.
 
Oil not being sold to America,can be a possibility. Saudi Arabia basically said no anymore than they are currently getting. This isn't so far fetched anymore.

If America becomes somewhat,or completely energy independent..it might be worse. Big companies would swarm in and try to control what's there,the market might be carved up among them and the people would have no choice but to pay what is demanded.
 
Man-made tornadoes could power the future

Engineer spins up plan to generate electricity from sucked-up air

080625-michaud-vortices-02-vmed.widec.jpg


By Michael Schirber

Coiled up in a tornado is as much energy as an entire power plant. So a Canadian engineer has a plan to spin up his own twister and extract energy from its tethered tail.
It all depends on heating the air near the surface so that it is much warmer than the air above.
"You can generate energy whenever you have a temperature gradient," said Louis Michaud. "The source of the energy here is the natural movement of warm and cold air currents."
Story continues below ↓ advertisement


These so-called convective air currents are only useful if they can be channeled in some way. That is why Michaud proposes using a tornado as a kind of drinking straw between the warm ground below and the cold sky above. Wind turbines placed at the bottom could generate electricity from the sucked-up air.
Whirlwind tour
Tornadoes and hurricanes form when sun-heated air near the surface rises and displaces cooler air above. As outside air rushes in to replace the rising air, the whole mass begins to rotate.
Michaud got the notion of a man-made tornado — what he calls the Atmospheric Vortex Engine (AVE) — while working as an engineer on gas turbines.
"When I looked further into it, I didn't run into anything that was impossible," Michaud told LiveScience.
The AVE structure is a 200-meter-wide arena with 100-meter-high walls. Warm humid air enters at the sides, directed to flow in a circular fashion. As the air whirls around at speeds up to 200 mph, a vacuum forms in the center, which holds the vortex together as it extends several miles into the sky.
The concept is similar to a solar chimney with the swirling walls of the vortex replacing the brick walls of the tower. But the AVE can reach much higher into the sky where the air is colder.
With wind turbines at the inlets to the arena, Michaud calculates that as much as 200 megawatts of electricity (enough for a small city) could be extracted without draining the vortex of its power.
"Look at natural tornadoes that destroy a house or carry off a car and still have plenty of energy left over," he said.
Waste heat
Michaud imagines the AVE could get its warm air from the exhaust of a power plant.
"Most power plants reject more than half of the heat that they make," he said.
The AVE could generate energy from this waste heat because it connects the ground to the upper atmosphere where the temperature gets as low as negative 60 degrees Celsius (80 degrees below zero Fahrenheit). This cold reservoir draws the warm air up fast enough to turn turbines.
"All you have to do is send the heat up there," Michaud said, and the extra energy from the AVE could increase the output of a power plant by 40 percent.
Making the tornado dependent on a waste heat supply would also be a built-in safety feature. "If it came off the base, there would be nothing to sustain the vortex," Michaud said.
He said the vortex might produce a little extra precipitation in the surrounding area.

Click for related content
Solar dish may revolutionize energy production
Less ‘zoom zoom’ could power the future
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25374031 Military developing brainwave binoculars


To build a 200 megawatt AVE facility would cost $60 million, Michaud estimates. This implies a cost per megawatt that is lower than all existing power generation technologies.
Michaud has tested many small prototypes and is currently working on a 4-meter wide AVE near his home in Ontario. The research comes mostly out his own pocket book, as he has not found an investor yet.
"Utility companies are risk-adverse," he said. "They prefer to buy from established vendors."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25374237/
 
I was going to say that the law of conservation of energy made this a pipe dream, but using the waste heat of power plants makes this a brilliant plan.
 
I would actually oppose this. Too dangerous. People don't want tornadoes in their back yard or their neighborhood, or even their city. Even if the tornado doesn't leave the base, it's still going to wreak havoc on the surrounding area with constant rain and thunderstorms. Plus having that many tornadoes all over the country running constantly could potentially have some unforseen effects on the globe's overall weather pattern.

Not too mention, who wants tonadoes anywhere near a power plant? Way too risky.
 
Give me one source of power that didn't harm the surrounding environment.
 
Cool. Though Obviosly they'll make a REALLY BIG and POWERFUL One and it'll brake loose. destroy a city and all that stuff.



:o
 
If you don't get burned, you will not learn. If you don't start a fire to avoid getting burned, you will die of hypothermia.
 
Give me one source of power that didn't harm the surrounding environment.

2 wrongs, or even 3 or 4 don't make a right. It's just too dangerous. It's not just a risk, it's guranteed consequences. In the city where I got to college there is a power plant. I can tell you the residents in that city do not want a constant tornado spinning in their city. We like nice sunny days at least once in a while, not constant rain, hail, thunderstorms, and hundred miles per hour wind.

Not too mention, what if the tornadoe destroys the power plant? We don't want nuclear fall out either.

Plus your talking about a LOT of tornadoes all over the country. Were talking about a lot more than we normally have. That is going to wreak havoc on the earth's weather patterns. This could end up having catostrophic consequences worse than oil or coal ever gave us. It could end up having no effect, but at the same time it could be a horrible disaster.
 
If you don't get burned, you will not learn. If you don't start a fire to avoid getting burned, you will die of hypothermia.


We already got burned, and I already learned, which is why I support clean safe alternative energies to avoid betting hypothermia.
 
We already got burned, and I already learned, which is why I support clean safe alternative energies to avoid betting hypothermia.

There is no such thing as clean safe alternative energies. Biofuels require energy to be refined which means you still need fossil fuels and the return once you get your clean fuel is negligible, the only reason it seems clean now is because of scale. Hydro electrical dams wreak havoc on the ecosystem. Wind turbines are benign by comparison but unreliable. Nuclear power is by far the most efficient in terms of energy to wasted heat ratio, but the byproducts last on a geological time scale (that said, the wost recorded meltdown killed 56 people, so I'd say it has a pretty good safety record). There is no such thing as clean or safe energy, it is all a question of scale.
 
2 wrongs, or even 3 or 4 don't make a right. It's just too dangerous. It's not just a risk, it's guranteed consequences. In the city where I got to college there is a power plant. I can tell you the residents in that city do not want a constant tornado spinning in their city. We like nice sunny days at least once in a while, not constant rain, hail, thunderstorms, and hundred miles per hour wind.

Who said this had to be going 24/7? Why can't it just be used to balance the scales between surplus and deficit?
 
I would actually oppose this. Too dangerous. People don't want tornadoes in their back yard or their neighborhood, or even their city. Even if the tornado doesn't leave the base, it's still going to wreak havoc on the surrounding area with constant rain and thunderstorms. Plus having that many tornadoes all over the country running constantly could potentially have some unforseen effects on the globe's overall weather pattern.

Not too mention, who wants tonadoes anywhere near a power plant? Way too risky.

lol whats the difference between haveing a Tornadoe in your back yard and a nuke in your back yard lol :woot:
 
Interesting idea. Good luck controlling a tornado once it's formed though.
 
Interesting idea. Good luck controlling a tornado once it's formed though.

The tornado can't leave its source of energy witch would be the man created heat. Once it leaves that area 2 things will happen the tornado will either rebound over the heated area or would leave the area and quickly Dissipate.

Plus the tornadoes might be completely man created in a closed environment. Just a bigger version of the tornado created in the picture above.
 
There is no such thing as clean safe alternative energies. Biofuels require energy to be refined which means you still need fossil fuels and the return once you get your clean fuel is negligible, the only reason it seems clean now is because of scale. Hydro electrical dams wreak havoc on the ecosystem. Wind turbines are benign by comparison but unreliable. Nuclear power is by far the most efficient in terms of energy to wasted heat ratio, but the byproducts last on a geological time scale (that said, the wost recorded meltdown killed 56 people, so I'd say it has a pretty good safety record). There is no such thing as clean or safe energy, it is all a question of scale.

and this is too freaking dangerous.

Who said this had to be going 24/7? Why can't it just be used to balance the scales between surplus and deficit?

they are obviously going to have to be running quite often, several times a day.
 
The tornado can't leave its source of energy witch would be the man created heat. Once it leaves that area 2 things will happen the tornado will either rebound over the heated area or would leave the area and quickly Dissipate.

Pulse the tornadoes might be completely man created in a closed environment. Just a bigger version of the tornado created in the picture above.

But how does this guy know it will dissipate? And what is considered quickly? Even if it takes only half a minute, that is half a minute too long. Plus if it's a hot day, than the tornadoe will continue to draw heat from the surface, and keep going.

Not too mention, the entire tornadoe would not be enclosed. Only the bottom portion of it.

Not to mention, even if it doesn't leave, it's still going to mess with our weather patterns.
 
lol whats the difference between haveing a Tornadoe in your back yard and a nuke in your back yard lol :woot:


Well the nuclear power plant in my former city, hurt no one, while tornadoes have cause much damage in that city. They have killed people and destroyed many buildings, and that is with only one or two tornadoes a year.

that is kind of a silly question.

and to top it off, this guy doesn't want one or th eother. He wants both, right next to each other. Constant tornadoes next to a power plant? it's going to weaken the structure of the building. What if it eventually causes a nuclear explosion?
 
and this is too freaking dangerous.

You keep ignoring the point that it is a question of scale. The article says he is only just starting to experiment with a 4 meter wide version. There is no indication yet that we are talking about creating a tornado to rival the most destructive of their natural counterparts.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,268
Messages
22,077,063
Members
45,876
Latest member
Crazygamer3011
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"