Slashdot Mirror

He sized the system to never have a surplus. The idea of buying power retail and paying for a bi-directional installation (cogen) and selling at wholesale rates didn't make any sense.

Sounds like what he needs is Guerilla Solar Power. When using such a system the meter will spin backwards when it is producing more power than is needed.

but are more than happy to suggest further intrusions on property and basic economic rights when it comes to alternative energy and environmental pet issues.

The environment is a pet issue? Already your world distortion field is pretty dire. You do realise that this 'pet issue' is the headlining subject of the G8 conference with Bush, Blair, et al?

There are many many issues to be worked and a top-down socialistic approach of using coercion and forcing the people to make changes that people haven't thought through or properly justified to a degree commensurate with the methods being used is only a prescription for disaster.

Well the high tax on cigarettes in Europe has saved thousands of lives and has made drinking and dining out a far more pleasant experience for everybody. I'd say rather than a disaster it was a complete success. Raising tax on leaded fuel and introducing stricter emmissions testing has meant everyone moving to unleaded petrol. Disaster? Er no, complete success.

The American economy is part and parcel of the world economy. If the American economy takes a total nose dive, then so too does the rest of the planet since we all trade with each other. Consider it an economic food chain or food web. You can't total any sizeable portion of it without totalling the rest.

Worry about yourself, don't worry about us. Apart from your pollution which we can't avoid (USA is 4% of world population causing 24% of world's pollution, afaicr).

[snip hysterical price rise rubbish]

The medley of interim solutions you suggest fails to take into account the advantage of moving to the hydrogen economy. It's like an energy abstraction layer. It can be generated in many different ways, including for free (not including capital cost, which is constantly dropping) via renewable energy or even captured from algae. It can then be used via fuel cells in cars and laptops, and even directly in a combustion engine. For more info, check out Future Energies.

Phillip.

How on EARTH did the parent get modded insightful? Ignoring even the fact the battery arguement has been rehashed a million times (I guess Eivind missed the dozens of posts on Slashdot about hydrogen fuel cells) but a next-gen electric motor that can extend the range of battery vehicles including the electric component of hybrid vehicles is great news. The extra acceleration is also important as this will help SELL clean-fuel cars.

I suggest Eivind reads:
http://futureenergies.com/

Phillip.

Wow, a Fuel Cell ($$$$) bike that has almost caught up with a pure Electric vehicle.

Actually if you RTFA you'll see it's a fuel-cell/electric hybrid.

Except that it's top speed is lower, it costs more to build, and is far more difficult to refuel.

On the other hand it's lighter, goes further and can be refilled in seconds instead of overnight.

The only reason Fuel Cells are being pushed so hard is that they retain the Big Company infrastructure needed to use them.

Big bad corporations being forced to do something good for the environment to survive? I could think of worse situations to be in.

You will need a large distribution network if you want to refuel lots of cars, AND you will need to produce all that hyrdrogen - which will likely be made from oil.

Large companies such have Shell have committed to installing hydrogen in all their petrol stations the moment there is any demand. We have a large network of LPG (Liquid Petrolium Gas) pumps despite a disappointigly low take-up of the technology.

To begin with the large oil corps will be pushing oil as a solution for generating hydrogen, but once our dependency switches to hydrogen then not only will more and more be generated by renewable energy but there will be such an incentive to find a more efficient way of extracting one of the most abundant substances in the universe I'm sure science will find the answer.

EV's can do it now at lower cost than Fool Cells, but for some reason are being ignored. (Or actively discouraged - like GM crushing the quite nice EV1's.)

Nice as the idea was, it turned out batteries just couldn't cut it. Battery technology has advanced but no-where near enough. The major laptop manufacturers are now showing off hydrogen fuel-cell laptops, and I've even seen fuel-cell mobile phone prototypes. I sincerely hope work will continue on developing electric vehicles, but I for one am exciting by the new hydrogen economy.
Check out:
http://www.futureenergies.com/

Phillip.

Wow, so much ignorance in one single post! Must be a record. Others have dealt with the FUD about solar. Windmills tend to be large, ugly and kill birds? When was the last time you visited a wind farm? The one's I've seen tend to be quiet and elegant. Hydrogen isn't a fuel source but just a fancy battery? Then petrol/gas isn't a fuel source either but just a fancy battery. You can convert a standard car to run on hydrogen instead of petrol. BMW has a car has an internal combustion engine tailored to get the best out of hydrogen pumped directly into the tank.

So, pray tell, how do we plan on generating alternate energy? Take the blinkers off and look around you. It's happening right now! Solar, wind, tidal, hydro, thermal, they are all growing. Check out Future Energies.

Phillip.

We need to stop producing CO2 ASAP, the world needs Future Energies and methods of making people understand that alternatives are here!
You might be interested in my project..... According to the latest predictions, oil production is likely to peak in 10
years. Alternative fuels must be deployed quickly before the world grinds to
a halt. Moreover, climate change as a direct result of fossil fuel
consumption threatens our very survival.
Green Motorsport is working to meet this challenge head-on by marketing,
developing, testing and demonstrating the viability of integrated renewable
energy solutions within the motorsport industry in both stationary and
mobile applications..see Green Motorsport.com and the info pack on the project here.

replace their lost ad revenue yourself? At least offer them an alternative before you start deriding them for doing something. Oh, and where the hell do YOU get off selling your creation and then acting as if you have a say in it after that, you dont, you gave it up for money so dont preach to me.

Absolute bollocks. If you run a magazine that has a certain moral stand then you mustn't compromise that otherwise the magazine is just a standing testament to hypocracy. And I CAN say this from having been there. With two friends we ran Future Energies magazine and we did it off our own savings. One of the guys lived in a shed in my garden. We sank every penny of our savings into it. We lasted two years before we couldn't sustain it any longer, renewable energy isn't big in the UK and with Bush destroying environmental legislation the USA is dying too, but we never compromised once. It's still just about getting along through the last remaining guy plus a loose network of volounteers.

The fact is when the new owners bought Linux Today they also bought into the responsibility of what that represented. If all they wanted to do was make a cheap buck then they should have bought some spam-mail software and sold viagra, instead of purchasing a magazine for enthusiasts then trying to subvert it. Or is responsibility a dirty word in your vocabulary?

Phillip.

You can even buy one on my site guys! Future Energies

Future Energies carried this article 2nd September last year. It has a few more details and links.

Phillip.

Solar works a lot better in the UK than you would imagine. The nearest retirement home to me is 100% solar powered. We certainly don't get the returns you would get in sunnier countries but it still works. There are articles on UK solar projects if you look in the archives of Future Energies.

Phillip.

Hydrogen - its an energy transportation mechanism, not a source. Its impact is little different than electrical wires with the exception that it allows you to "wire" a vehicle to a hydrogen generation plant that will likely be oil fueled. To date, it is cheaper to mass produce hydrogen from oil than any other substance.

The point is that you can generate it in so many ways. Using oil, solar powered hydro-electrolysis, on-the-fly in a methanol powered fuel-cell, etc. The point is that when oil runs out, there will be many other ways of powering the infrastructure that has been put in place.

Wind - oh come on. Those things are a noisy, ugly blight on the landscape.

Have you actually visited a modern wind-turbine?

Has anybody even bothered to figure out the total energy cost of manufacturing and raw materials on these monstrosities?

Er, it's just a big dynamo. It's simple to contruct.

So what's the answer. Nuclear of course. Its the only answer.

There's your big mistake. Assuming there is *one* single solution. Maybe we need to move to a distributed environment where energy comes from multiple sources? Solar panels on the roof, a small turbine in the back yard, the ability to export energy into the neighbourhood to help smooth load spikes. To make up the shortfall each region can use tech most suited to their environment. Solar in sunnier climes, wind power in windy areas, tidal power where appropriate.

Plenty of stories about new technologies and think you can do to help can be found here.

Phillip.

1) UPS has battery that runs out. This has hydrogen that runs out. same deal.?

Not same deal. You can keep popping out any buying more hydrogen cannisters and go indefinately with the fuel cell. Your UPS will buy you some time (enough time to shut down your networks safely) but not to continue operations. Essentially it is generator and UPS all rolled into one.

In obtaining more hydrogen, you can either buy it or you can generate it yourself (though electrolysis - via solar or mains). You can see the latest fuel cell stories at Future Energies.

Phillip.

a fuel cell's output is limited by the membrane capacity: the ability to produce high peaks for short periods is missing

Can't you just put a large capacitor in series with it to solve that problem?

[fuel cell problems] world supply of platinum limited, high temperatures needed for high efficiencies, corrosive media, thermal management, carbon monoxide and dioxide poisoning

Membranes are getting cheaper and cheaper as the technology progresses. Not sure what you mean about the last one, the only output of a fuel cell is pure water. The high temperatures can easily be dealt with... there are even small fuel cells that run laptops these days.

seem always on the verge of being solved but never getting there

Well commercial fuel cells have been around for a while. My local swimming pool has been powered by fuel cell for the last couple of years. I'm tempted to buy a domestic one for my next house. GM has promised mass production of fuel cell cars for 2008.

The last time I read an article on the future of fuel cells was the dead wood version of Scientific American in 1999. I'm not aware of any real breakthroughs since.

Where HAVE you been??? Even if you only read Slashdot you would see articles about fuel cells in laptops (plus obigatory dup), Sci American 2002 about GM, Wired article about GM $1bn bet, and more. Fuel cells are a big deal today.

Phillip.

Recently, although I don't think it's always, they have had an article on how easy it is to convert your existing car to an electric one.

I've spoken to a few people that have done it, and are very happy with the result. They are faster than conventional cars, apparently because the electric motors give more torque. Here is one home conversion that does 100mph and cost £6,000 to convert. Running cost works out at £0.018 per mile.

I'm not likely to blow $20k on solar panels on my roof

Expect prices to drop. There are companies like BP pouring millions into research. Current solar technology is maxing out around 20% effecient, and uses rather nasty substances to make, so the hunt is on for alternative fabrication materials and methods (eg here).

I did, however, convert all my light bulbs to fluorescent

There are new energy efficient light bulbs that run on under 20 watts, are blindingly bright, but best of all now cost less than (afaicr) a couple of quid.

I'm even considering one of those insulating spreads that you wrap around the water heaters.

Essential. Also look out for micro-CHP coming soon (CHP = Combined Heat and Power). CHP is in wide use today in large buildings. Converting electricity to heat or vice versa is very inefficient, and you can get a max of 40% return. By producing both at the same time, you can get 90% return on the energy you put in.

Phillip.

Enron and M$ are latecomers to the time-share President. The oil industry leads Bush firmly by the nose. Not only do they get all the environmental legislation they want struck down but get cushy jobs and $60,000 bungs. Read more here. Anyway, that's getting off-topic. It was hardly a secret that M$ was paying off Bush not to break them up, and if a President can be bought with no obvious repercussions then you cannot expect M$ not to play the system within which they exist. For them it's just a cost of doing business. If you don't like it then it's up to you to talk to your representative and get them to put rules in to make your polititians more accountable.

In this case, the FCC have stood up and put the public first. For this the FCC are to be commended. It's not the first case I've noticed either where the FCC have got it spot on. They appear to be fairly well insulated from the polititians which may explain their consistency (though I am quite ignorant about the inner workings of the FCC).

Phillip.

First let's look at your hydrogen comments:

# Hydrogen is hard to contain - you either use expensive cryogenics, or you have to use zeolite entrainment to contain it. It weakens steel containers by diffusing into the container and migrating to the ever-present microfractures and expanding them (hydrogen embrittlement)

There is plenty of research going on in this area, which are going in two different directions. The first is in using new materials for reinforced containers, and the second is storing the hydrogen within another material, such as boron, and using a catalyst to release it on the fly as you need it. Both are making good progress.

# You have to make hydrogen from something - you therefor have to have some other energy source. Either that source is burning carbon in some form, or it's splitting atoms. Wind and wave are cool, but not universally available nor do they have the power density to meet all needs (not to say that they shouldn't be harvested....)

It can be using solar power, which is available everywhere. Wind and wave can be used to produce hydrogen, which can then be shipped or piped anywhere in the world like any other fuel. Heat can be used but it doesn't need to be burning carbons, it could be the excess electricity from a CHP (Combined Heat and Power) station.

# There aren't hydrogen stations on every corner. Until there are, anyone driving a hydrogen car will have to plan any long trips very carefully. True, this would correct itself if enough people drive H2 vehicles, but they won't drive them until the stations exists, but the stations won't be built until the cars are bought....

There weren't LPG (Liquid Petroleum Gas) stations on each corner before it was invented, now they are available everywhere in the UK. Stick a solar array in the garden and connect it to an electrolysis kit and you might be able to produce enough hydrogen to get to work each morning (I haven't tried calculating this one). You can certainly buy ones off the shelf today that plug in the mains (and no that doesn't necessarily mean you are just pushing back the burning of fossil fuels back to the power station, there are electricity companies these days that supply 100% Green electricity).

# Hydrogen requires a special engine to burn - either a fuel cell, or a modified internal combustion engine. If you DO take a trip and screw up your planning, you are stuck.

Screw up your planning? That makes no sense. Do you mean break down? In which case you use your insurance, though since fuel cell engines have few moving parts the chances should be slim.

# Hydrogen engines DO reduce the low-altitude pollution - no unburned hydrocarbons, and fuel cells produce little NOx and no SOx

If we skip straight to pure hydrogen as a fuel, then there will be zero pollution.

# Fuel cells are expensive right now. They might get cheaper later, however

There is no 'might' about it.

As regards biodiesel, the major problem is that it doesn't scale. Can you imagine the surface area needed to produce enough crops to then extract sufficient energy to then drive all the world's cars? Secondly it _does_ need energy to extract the fuel: machines are needed to go harvest the crops, then to process them, not forgetting the transport of all the workers needed to operate these machines.

Still, well done on opening up the debate. You can learn much more about the merits of fuel cells and biodiesel at Future Energies magazine.

Phillip.

There are a couple of problems with biodiesel. The first is the sheer land area needed to grow enough crop to extract the necessary amount of fuel (also add the manpower to harvest and process it). The second is that Carnot's Law, where by burning a fuel to extract energy you can only get a maximum of 40% efficiency (fuel cell theoretically you can get 100%). This makes biodiesel a good intermediary fuel to help wean us of fossil fuels whilst we get the hydrogen economy in place, but not a long-term solution. Finally watch out if you have an older car. From memory (please correct me if I am wrong) biodiesel will ruin any rubber seals in the engine but this is not a problem in newer cars which only use plastic seals. There are lots of interesting articles on biodiesel at Future Energies magazine.

Phillip.

well, I am the AC from #3395157 that you sent over here. while i applaud your desire to do something feasible, and to do it now, you don't seem to realise that while you might not want to pave death valley for environmental reason solar panels themselves are environmentally damaging. aside from mining the materials necessary to build them, their production creates a variety of highly toxic compounds. so unfortunately increasing our production of solar cells will still be bad for the environment. part of the appeal of doing it on the moon is that no one really cares about that, there, yet.

that said a great site is futureenergies.com for alternative energy.

I thought I'd wrap up a number of points in one post rather than make several replies:

"Also, if I'm staying in a hotel, charging my batteries is free."

It's not free, the hotels expect you to do it and build it into the cost. If methanol becomes popular with travellers, the hotel will pop down to the hardware store, buy a couple of gallons of methanol, and offer that free on tap to guests too.

"This will become even worse if cells arrive that run off of pure hydrogen-PEM (proton exchange membrane) fuel cells that run on hydrogen"

All PEM fuel cells run on hydrogen. Methanol based fuel cells simply break down the methanol into hydrogen and its constituent parts before it hits the PEM.

"However, if the methanol charges for the fuel cells are not rechargeable themselves, we will be adding a MORE exhaust to the environment, in the form of the disposed charger."

You don't recharge a methanol cell, you just squirt in more methanol to replace what has been used up.

"Ok, fine methanol works as a safe hydrogen storage method, but I was under the impression that fuel cells use hydrogen AND oxygen to create electricity and as a byproduct create H2O. Where does the water go?"

Methanol is 50% oxygen, 37.5% carbon and 12.5% hydrogen. So yes water will be produced and there must be some drainage tap (so you will have to take your laptop for a pee on the plane). There will also be carbon deposits you will have to dispose of. I wonder also how often the PEM has to be changed, as carbon will clog it up if not effectively filtered out.

There are plenty of fuel cell articles at Future Energies, including how a fuel cell is heating my local swimming pool! Check it out.

Phillip.

Check out the Methanol-Powered NECAR 5 Fuel Cell Vehicle Gfoat FutureEnergies.com

Sorry but oil companies are not the people pushing fuel cell technology. Try DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, amongst others. You will find most of the oil companies 'fuel cell research' are actually 'joint ventures' with other large companies where they encourage the use of gasoline as a fuel cell source instead of alternatives such as hydrogen. And though some of the oil companies do some solar research, a lot of their technology is based on buying up small independant solar firms. Oil companies have nothing *against* alternative energy but their motivation is profit at any price. Thanks to independant work being done all over the world, and plenty of governments subsidy, green energy is now being eyed by oil companies as a new cost-effective area in which they can become a monopoly.

Phillip.

Sorry but oil companies are not the people pushing fuel cell technology. Try DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, amongst others. You will find most of the oil companies 'fuel cell research' are actually 'joint ventures' with other large companies where they encourage the use of gasoline as a fuel cell source instead of alternatives such as hydrogen. And though some of the oil companies do some solar research, a lot of their technology is based on buying up small independant solar firms. Oil companies have nothing *against* alternative energy but their motivation is profit at any price. Thanks to independant work being done all over the world, and plenty of governments subsidy, green energy is now being eyed by oil companies as a new cost-effective area in which they can become a monopoly.

Phillip.

Sorry but oil companies are not the people pushing fuel cell technology. Try DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, amongst others. You will find most of the oil companies 'fuel cell research' are actually 'joint ventures' with other large companies where they encourage the use of gasoline as a fuel cell source instead of alternatives such as hydrogen. And though some of the oil companies do some solar research, a lot of their technology is based on buying up small independant solar firms. Oil companies have nothing *against* alternative energy but their motivation is profit at any price. Thanks to independant work being done all over the world, and plenty of governments subsidy, green energy is now being eyed by oil companies as a new cost-effective area in which they can become a monopoly.

Phillip.

Sorry but oil companies are not the people pushing fuel cell technology. Try DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, amongst others. You will find most of the oil companies 'fuel cell research' are actually 'joint ventures' with other large companies where they encourage the use of gasoline as a fuel cell source instead of alternatives such as hydrogen. And though some of the oil companies do some solar research, a lot of their technology is based on buying up small independant solar firms. Oil companies have nothing *against* alternative energy but their motivation is profit at any price. Thanks to independant work being done all over the world, and plenty of governments subsidy, green energy is now being eyed by oil companies as a new cost-effective area in which they can become a monopoly.

Phillip.

Sorry but oil companies are not the people pushing fuel cell technology. Try DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, amongst others. You will find most of the oil companies 'fuel cell research' are actually 'joint ventures' with other large companies where they encourage the use of gasoline as a fuel cell source instead of alternatives such as hydrogen. And though some of the oil companies do some solar research, a lot of their technology is based on buying up small independant solar firms. Oil companies have nothing *against* alternative energy but their motivation is profit at any price. Thanks to independant work being done all over the world, and plenty of governments subsidy, green energy is now being eyed by oil companies as a new cost-effective area in which they can become a monopoly.

Phillip.

But what I would like to see would be a competition for fuel-cell based vehicles. Fuel Cells are obviously the way forward for the future, so why is no attention paid to them ?

There are competitions involving fuel cells, including Future Truck and karting. Fuel Cells take a lot of R&D but when their price begins to decline we will see a lot of independant parties begin to become creative with what can be done... then we will see an increase in the number of races.

Could it be that the big oil interests have no interest in a cheap efficient environmentally friendly source of power ?

The big oil interests certainly have an interest in green energy... if it will make them money. Look at BP buying up all the small solar companies and cornering the market in solar cells.

You have to wonder sometimes when good technology is ignored, is there some sort of hidden oil-company aganda ?

Fuel cell technology is certainly not being ignored, it has massive momentum behind it. Most of this is from the car companies, who don't really care what goes into the engine (oil, hydrogen, etc) as long as people buy their cars. If fuel cell technology fails to take off it will be because of public apathy in supporting it, prefering to pay slightly less for old established petrol based polluting machines instead of the new and inevitably to begin with more expensive green option.

Phillip.

But what I would like to see would be a competition for fuel-cell based vehicles. Fuel Cells are obviously the way forward for the future, so why is no attention paid to them ?

There are competitions involving fuel cells, including Future Truck and karting. Fuel Cells take a lot of R&D but when their price begins to decline we will see a lot of independant parties begin to become creative with what can be done... then we will see an increase in the number of races.

Could it be that the big oil interests have no interest in a cheap efficient environmentally friendly source of power ?

The big oil interests certainly have an interest in green energy... if it will make them money. Look at BP buying up all the small solar companies and cornering the market in solar cells.

You have to wonder sometimes when good technology is ignored, is there some sort of hidden oil-company aganda ?

Fuel cell technology is certainly not being ignored, it has massive momentum behind it. Most of this is from the car companies, who don't really care what goes into the engine (oil, hydrogen, etc) as long as people buy their cars. If fuel cell technology fails to take off it will be because of public apathy in supporting it, prefering to pay slightly less for old established petrol based polluting machines instead of the new and inevitably to begin with more expensive green option.

Phillip.

• ease of use - the gui is much easier to learn than eg Windows
  
• ROM based - not only does it take less power by not having to access the HD all the time but it cannot get corrupted (not many techies in 3rd world countries to fix screwed up OS)
  
• fast - the OS has been hand-optimised in assembler making it responsive even on low-power processors
  

Though they give running of a solar cell as an example, it can be a hybrid of many types of renewable energy. Wind, biomass (extracting oil from plants to power generator), etc. You can read more about what's going on in the world at Future Energies.

Phillip.

I guess Bush has watched Armageddon one too many times. Trying to reverse the effects of long-term damage to our planet when disaster actually strikes would be like trying to get an oil tanker at full speed to do a hand-brake turn. But I guess old coyboy Bush will just send up Bruce Willis to nuke a passing frozen comet over our atmosphere.

Check out Future Energies - the practical way to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

Phillip.

Take a look at Future Energies. Their top article is "First Public biodiesel pumps open" which has happened in San Francisco. Lots of other articles there about fuel cell cars, electric cars, etc.

Phillip.

We ran this story in February in Future Energies (which in turn we picked up on from Salt Lake Tribune), and we were also excited about the possible power savings. We know that in conventional grid it's around 20%. When carrying the AC current there will be losses by motion of magnetic flux though the superconductor. Can anyone tell us what the losses will be through the superconducting cable?

Phillip.

You can see a breakdown of the new budget for renewable energy here. Funding for solar has been cut 49%, as has wind power.

At the same time, Bush plans to build 1,300 new power stations whilst opening the Alaska wildlife reserve for oil exploration.

Does anyone else feel Bush was voted in the wrong decade?

Phillip.

Solar works fine in England, even when travelling by boat or car. Cloud cover cuts off far less solar power than you might imagine.

Phillip.

Solar works fine in England, even when travelling by boat or car. Cloud cover cuts off far less solar power than you might imagine.

Phillip.

Right, two can play at this game. I am in the middle of launching a company that handles press releases online. You should take a look at Presscentre.net. The idea behind it was that all the "What's New" type programs on Freshmeat were far too limited and I wanted to provide a service where the small guys could compete with the big guys in PR for a fraction of the price. In fact, it's more feature packed that most press systems you will find on large corporate sites. It will plug into any web site and takes around 10 mins to set up (excluding any graphics design). All for around $2560 per year. Take a look. (note: this provides features for your web site, we do *not* spam journalists though an opt-in feature for journalists is being provided)

On another note, I also write for Future Energies (a non-profit magazine promoting renewable energy) and normally automatically bin press releases except... when (a) they are genuinely newsworthy and (b) they are already written in the form of an article, don't fawn over the originator, hence require little editing to post.

Phillip.

First of all, nuclear is not the only option. There are a myriad of options available including wind, solar, wave and biomass. There are many different fuel types including fuel-cell, compressed-air, MagneGas, biodiesel.

Global warming is happening, and the evidence points to man being a significan contributer. The USA is the major culprit producing 25% of CO2 emissions but, except for a few enlightened individuals, they do not care. This is unfortunate as it is a global problem that can only be tackled on a global scale.

There is an online magazine covering all the newest renewable and sustainable energy called Future Energies. They also have an item on the Greening Earth Society, mentioned elsewhere, who happen to be affiliated with the Western Fuels Association. They claim the Internet will be responsible for up to 50% of electricity consumed in the USA! Read more here.

Phillip.

First of all, nuclear is not the only option. There are a myriad of options available including wind, solar, wave and biomass. There are many different fuel types including fuel-cell, compressed-air, MagneGas, biodiesel.

Global warming is happening, and the evidence points to man being a significan contributer. The USA is the major culprit producing 25% of CO2 emissions but, except for a few enlightened individuals, they do not care. This is unfortunate as it is a global problem that can only be tackled on a global scale.

There is an online magazine covering all the newest renewable and sustainable energy called Future Energies. They also have an item on the Greening Earth Society, mentioned elsewhere, who happen to be affiliated with the Western Fuels Association. They claim the Internet will be responsible for up to 50% of electricity consumed in the USA! Read more here.

Phillip.

First of all, nuclear is not the only option. There are a myriad of options available including wind, solar, wave and biomass. There are many different fuel types including fuel-cell, compressed-air, MagneGas, biodiesel.

Global warming is happening, and the evidence points to man being a significan contributer. The USA is the major culprit producing 25% of CO2 emissions but, except for a few enlightened individuals, they do not care. This is unfortunate as it is a global problem that can only be tackled on a global scale.

There is an online magazine covering all the newest renewable and sustainable energy called Future Energies. They also have an item on the Greening Earth Society, mentioned elsewhere, who happen to be affiliated with the Western Fuels Association. They claim the Internet will be responsible for up to 50% of electricity consumed in the USA! Read more here.

Phillip.

First of all, nuclear is not the only option. There are a myriad of options available including wind, solar, wave and biomass. There are many different fuel types including fuel-cell, compressed-air, MagneGas, biodiesel.

Global warming is happening, and the evidence points to man being a significan contributer. The USA is the major culprit producing 25% of CO2 emissions but, except for a few enlightened individuals, they do not care. This is unfortunate as it is a global problem that can only be tackled on a global scale.

There is an online magazine covering all the newest renewable and sustainable energy called Future Energies. They also have an item on the Greening Earth Society, mentioned elsewhere, who happen to be affiliated with the Western Fuels Association. They claim the Internet will be responsible for up to 50% of electricity consumed in the USA! Read more here.

Phillip.

First of all, nuclear is not the only option. There are a myriad of options available including wind, solar, wave and biomass. There are many different fuel types including fuel-cell, compressed-air, MagneGas, biodiesel.

Global warming is happening, and the evidence points to man being a significan contributer. The USA is the major culprit producing 25% of CO2 emissions but, except for a few enlightened individuals, they do not care. This is unfortunate as it is a global problem that can only be tackled on a global scale.

There is an online magazine covering all the newest renewable and sustainable energy called Future Energies. They also have an item on the Greening Earth Society, mentioned elsewhere, who happen to be affiliated with the Western Fuels Association. They claim the Internet will be responsible for up to 50% of electricity consumed in the USA! Read more here.

Phillip.

The most basic of tenets in physics is, "energy can be neither created nor destroyed, merely transformed from one form to another". The wave power effect of reducing the amplitude of waves is not odd. The amplitude of the wave is proportional to the potential energy it has. If you remove some of that potential energy by transforming it to electricity then you will reduce the amplitude of the wave. I wondered myself whether there would be any environmental impact but I haven't seen any evidence to date.

We think of solar as free energy, but if we covered the surface of the planet in solar panels, these would absorb the solar radiation and release very little. This will cool the planet and we'd have alarmists warning of another ice age :->

Solar can heat medium sized buildings, like this 4,600m three storey building here, but for high-rise buildings in close proximity you will need to feed the buildings from the grid where power can be taken from solar farms feeding in from more open areas.

There is no such thing as 'free' energy, and even the green alternatives will have an impact in some way on the checks and balances that make this world run. As a species that demands vast energy from an ecosystem not geared to provide it, we have to assess the risks and benefits of each source we decide to ramp up to the scale required to provide the energy we demand.

You say nuclear isn't done any more, but from what I remember (correct me if I'm wrong), over 90% of all power generated in France is nuclear. Tell people that using xxx power would make half the species of wildlife in the world extinct and people would shrug and carry on using it regardless. Suggest to people that through global warming subsequent natural disasters could lose them their homes, and they will suddently becomes "environmentally conscious". People have a perceived risk to themselves, fostered by the US media, hence nuclear does not happen for you.

Personally I'm in favour of localised power generation through appropriate green technologies (appropriate means balancing environmental impact with power levels required), coupled with reducing consumption.

We are all techies on here, and claim to be environmentally conscious, but then explain why a TV on stand-by takes randomly between 2W and 40W. Take it to your companies, make them think about working smarter to save power.

Phillip.

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

The problems in California are solvable and solvable in a renewable way. The technology exists, but people have to downsize their power requirements or move to localised power generation.

To release more power for industry, houses could reduce their power requirements to less than 5% present values as illustrated by Huf Haus and Dr Susan Roaf

Taking this theme further, why not get rid of the bureacracy required to put power into the grid. Solar Guerillas are acting illegally in contributing green power back into the grid.

In England, forward thinking Dot Com companies are using Solar power to powerer their buildings and how many hours of sunlight do we get compared to California?

And when there is not enough sun (in California??) there are certainly waves

Gordon Foat

People talk about increasing the power generated to cover the world's power consumption needs. Personally I think it should be a two-pronged approach. Firstly increasing renewable energy sources, and secondly reducing overall consumption so that the percentage of power that comes from renewable energy is again increased.

This is why I read Future Energies. It tries to cover both. For example a compressed-air powered car that can travel 60km/h for 120km on a 30cents charge. Solar-powered parking meters that don't need to be on the grid at all.

There is no point upgrading to state-of-the-art radiators if you are going to leave your windows open.

Phillip.