Discussion: Alternative Energy

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.

Yes there is. This guy's proposal for supplying energy inclludes making tornadoes that extend several miles into the sky, above the arena.

he's not talking about 20 foot tornadoes.
 
End goal. He's not anywhere near that and if problems arise during the build up he will have to address them accordingly. You on the other hand throw the whole thing out on principle. Not scientific or a rational assessment of the pros and cons seeing as none of us, him included, has enough data to make such an assessment yet.
 
End goal. He's not anywhere near that and if problems arise during the build up he will have to address them accordingly. You on the other hand throw the whole thing out on principle. Not scientific or a rational assessment of the pros and cons seeing as none of us, him included, has enough data to make such an assessment yet.

the point is his goal sucks, and his goal is what I'm opposed to. I know his tiny little experiements aren't the problem, it's what he wants done with them. Yes I throw the whole thing out the window. It's crazy. for one thing it's politically infeasible, because voters don't like tornadoes.
 
They don't like the idea of robot overlords either so computers should just be scrapped and the evil of the internet should be done away with before we end up on the brink of oblivion. You know what else voters don't like? Forest fires. I mean its obvious that combustion is way too dangerous. Fire should be outlawed. The risks are just way too huge.

Personally, I think his original plan is rather unfeasible for all the reasons you said. However, a little ingenuity with some piping and the judicious application of division means that the same amount of power could perhaps be generated by four fifty meter wide arenas spaced a safe distance from the actual power plant and each other. But I guess we shouldn't even try for that, because we should just judge everything on hypotheticals.
 
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.

A tornado that extends several miles into the sky and produces 200 mile per hour winds is not going to simply sit in one place without reacting to its environment. I don't think people realize just how big, dangerous, and unpredictable a tornado that size can be. Beyond that, I think Spider-Bite addresses most of the appropriate counterpoints in his above post.

Personally, I don't think there's much cause for concern regarding this idea in its current form, as it probably won't get off the ground either because of lack of support or because too many problems will arise during development.
 
I'm going to guess and say that if we change nothing and never start rationing or changing behavior, we'll suddenly run out in 30-50 years. Didn't read the article--what did it say?
 
It's called yellow journalism. Media and politicians hype everything up to its utmost extremes to terrify people into action.

I agree, however, that we need to focus on finding other energy sources, but it's not like we're running out of oil in the next couple of years.
 
It's called yellow journalism. Media and politicians hype everything up to its utmost extremes to terrify people into action.

I agree, however, that we need to focus on finding other energy sources, but it's not like we're running out of oil in the next couple of years.

:up:
 
It's called yellow journalism. Media and politicians hype everything up to its utmost extremes to terrify people into action.

I agree, however, that we need to focus on finding other energy sources, but it's not like we're running out of oil in the next couple of years.
T. Boone Pickens is hardly a yellow journalist, and no credible source (such as those that say "about thirty years") is saying it will be in the next couple of years. That said, if China and India develop enough in a short time, it could become a problem really quick. If it's not in a couple years, gas will certainly be unaffordable in the next decade or so.
 
I'm going to guess and say that if we change nothing and never start rationing or changing behavior, we'll suddenly run out in 30-50 years. Didn't read the article--what did it say?

Probably more like, in 30-50 years most, if not all, the easy oil in the Middle East (and possibly elsewhere) will be gone. Might not actually be out of oil, per say, but getting it would become far more expensive if consumption isn't curbed soon.
 
According to the Hubbert Curve, the Middle East will reach peak production by 2040. If developing nations such as India and China become exceedingly wealthy in the coming decades, however, the Middle East may reach peak production much sooner than that.

Hubbert accurately predicted that the United States would reach peak oil production in the mid-1970s... so I trust his predictions on the Middle East.

Point being, we need to focus on alternative energies instead of relying on non-renewable fossil fuels for our energy needs.
 
According to the Hubbert Curve, the Middle East will reach peak production by 2040. If developing nations such as India and China become exceedingly wealthy in the coming decades, however, the Middle East may reach peak production much sooner than that.

Hubbert accurately predicted that the United States would reach peak oil production in the mid-1970s... so I trust his predictions on the Middle East.

Point being, we need to focus on alternative energies instead of relying on non-renewable fossil fuels for our energy needs.
 
So your say there is more than 30 years of oil left for the world?
There's probably centuries worth of oil left.

but they'll milk you into thinking otherwise.

otherwise why aren't these big oil companies buying up renewable energy companies like those solar panel/fuel cell/hydrogen vehicles instead of crushing them.


Their business plan is easily to monopolise the market.

Everybody is on their payroll. Exactly the same as these carbon footprint people who have managed to fool us all into thinking about carbon emmissions without bullet proof evidence global warming via its increase is actually happening.

badwagon tactics.
 
T. Boone Pickens is hardly a yellow journalist, and no credible source (such as those that say "about thirty years") is saying it will be in the next couple of years. That said, if China and India develop enough in a short time, it could become a problem really quick. If it's not in a couple years, gas will certainly be unaffordable in the next decade or so.

It's in Pickens interests to keep the prices high. Claiming that were only a couple years away from running out of it helps his case.
 
The Next Industrial Revolution is Upon Us

Two hundred years ago, the United States started working towards industrialization. We developed manufactured goods at a surprising rate and gave birth to various industries which continue to sustain our economy today. We saw the emergence of factories, railroads, and the steel industry. This eventually gave way to the automobile industry, the airline industry, and information technology. All of this gave led to unprecedented economic success in the United States, with consumerism taking a place in deep in the hearts of most Americans, right next to religion and political identity.

However, we as a nation did not foresee the numerous problems associated with industrialization. We did not foresee air and water pollution. We did not foresee the vast depletion of ecosystems around the planet. We did not see the continuous use and waste of non-renewable resources, particularly oil.

As a result, we have destroyed our environment. This isn't about climate change-- that is an environmental problem we face, yes, but there are more problems at hand. Our increased waste, mostly as a result of inefficient resources, has caused irreversible damage to our ecosystems. Plant and animal species are going extinct at a rate of 3,000 per year, and the it is estimated that roughly half the species we have today will be gone within the next century. Water pollution plagues our cities, as does air pollution. We have a public health crisis, as well as an ecological crisis, which needs to be addressed.

Well, fear not, for the next industrial revolution is upon us: Eco-effective manufacturing.

What is eco-effectiveness? This is a response to the idea of eco-efficiency, which says that we should continue to use natural resources as long as we increase the efficiency of those products. That, my friends, is a foolish idea at best. Eco-efficiency tells us that we should be less bad towards the environment. We shouldn't be less bad; we shouldn't engage in bad environmental practices at all.

So how do we do this? How do we engage in eco-effective design and manufacturing practices?

It's simple: We design products which run along a closed-loop system of design-- that is, they are produced, used, and re-used. No, this doesn't follow the same recycling patterns we follow today, where recycled paper becomes cardboard and that cardboard doesn't become anything else. We're talking about designing products which can be disassembled and either 1) sent back to the environment as biodegradable material, or 2) transformed into other products.

What does this do? This eliminates waste. When consumers are done with the products they own, they can return them to the manufacturer for a financial incentive. Then those products are either refurnished and put back on the marketplace, or disassembled and used for other purposes.

Sounds crazy, right? In fact, it sounds downright silly. Why would corporations want to reuse these products? Because-- it eliminates a corporations' need to extract additional resources from the earth, which cuts production costs significantly.

This, my friends, is the next industrial revolution: Eco-effective design and manufacturing. This concept, as promoted in the book Cradle to Cradle by William McDonough and Michael Braungart, has already been implemented by small businesses and major corporations around the world.

I urge you to go to this website and learn about this new design strategy. I also urge you purchase the book Cradle to Cradle for a truly enhancing literary and political experience.

Feel free to ask questions about Cradle-to-Cradle/ eco-effective design. While I am not a true expert on the topic, I know enough to answer basic questions.
 
The Next Industrial Revolution is Upon Us


Two hundred years ago, the United States started working towards industrialization. We developed manufactured goods at a surprising rate and gave birth to various industries which continue to sustain our economy today. We saw the emergence of factories, railroads, and the steel industry. This eventually gave way to the automobile industry, the airline industry, and information technology. All of this gave led to unprecedented economic success in the United States, with consumerism taking a place in deep in the hearts of most Americans, right next to religion and political identity.

However, we as a nation did not foresee the numerous problems associated with industrialization. We did not foresee air and water pollution. We did not foresee the vast depletion of ecosystems around the planet. We did not see the continuous use and waste of non-renewable resources, particularly oil.

As a result, we have destroyed our environment. This isn't about climate change-- that is an environmental problem we face, yes, but there are more problems at hand. Our increased waste, mostly as a result of inefficient resources, has caused irreversible damage to our ecosystems. Plant and animal species are going extinct at a rate of 3,000 per year, and the it is estimated that roughly half the species we have today will be gone within the next century. Water pollution plagues our cities, as does air pollution. We have a public health crisis, as well as an ecological crisis, which needs to be addressed.

Well, fear not, for the next industrial revolution is upon us: Eco-effective manufacturing.

What is eco-effectiveness? This is a response to the idea of eco-efficiency, which says that we should continue to use natural resources as long as we increase the efficiency of those products. That, my friends, is a foolish idea at best. Eco-efficiency tells us that we should be less bad towards the environment. We shouldn't be less bad; we shouldn't engage in bad environmental practices at all.

So how do we do this? How do we engage in eco-effective design and manufacturing practices?

It's simple: We design products which run along a closed-loop system of design-- that is, they are produced, used, and re-used. No, this doesn't follow the same recycling patterns we follow today, where recycled paper becomes cardboard and that cardboard doesn't become anything else. We're talking about designing products which can be disassembled and either 1) sent back to the environment as biodegradable material, or 2) transformed into other products.

What does this do? This eliminates waste. When consumers are done with the products they own, they can return them to the manufacturer for a financial incentive. Then those products are either refurnished and put back on the marketplace, or disassembled and used for other purposes.

Sounds crazy, right? In fact, it sounds downright silly. Why would corporations want to reuse these products? Because-- it eliminates a corporations' need to extract additional resources from the earth, which cuts production costs significantly.

This, my friends, is the next industrial revolution: Eco-effective design and manufacturing. This concept, as promoted in the book Cradle to Cradle by William McDonough and Michael Braungart, has already been implemented by small businesses and major corporations around the world.

I urge you to go to this website and learn about this new design strategy. I also urge you purchase the book Cradle to Cradle for a truly enhancing literary and political experience.

Feel free to ask questions about Cradle-to-Cradle/ eco-effective design. While I am not a true expert on the topic, I know enough to answer basic questions.

Interesting stuff, jman. After a series of fictional novels, I've been looking to go back into non-fiction. I think you just gave me my book. :up:
 
Very interesing... I'll have to check this out when I have a moment.

Also, since we're about to possibly make a down payment on the auto industry, and will presumably own their asses; why can't we just tell them to built something else and exactly how we want them to do it? Hasn't that been done in the past, like say in WWII? This seems like a good moment in time to start implementing these things. We need to get back into manufacturing, and be on the cutting edge.
 
Also, since we're about to possibly make a down payment on the auto industry, and will presumably own their asses; why can't we just tell them to built something else and exactly how we want them to do it? Hasn't that been done in the past, like say in WWII? This seems like a good moment in time to start implementing these things. We need to get back into manufacturing, and be on the cutting edge.

i say we just mention that to Obama so we can take him up on his word about creating a couple million jobs
 
I still am not entirely sold that the green collar movement will produce the promised results. Time will tell though.
 
The focus of the company where my dad works is fuel cells, which are going to be the backbone of pretty much any green power plan that comes up in the future. :D
 
I still am not entirely sold that the green collar movement will produce the promised results. Time will tell though.

This is entirely separate from the green collar movement.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"