nuke or fossil fuel

[billyo]

now that the price of oil is heading to the moon should we embrace nuke power, as for wind farms i was in favor until they put about 500 of those wind turbines of the cumbria coast, and this week got planning to double it , funny they dont look so cute in these numbers, please dont turn this post to immigration as my head hurts

 

[2scoops0406]

here

 

[Shutpa]

now that the price of oil is heading to the moon should we embrace nuke power, as for wind farms i was in favor until they put about 500 of those wind turbines of the cumbria coast, and this week got planning to double it , funny they dont look so cute in these numbers, please dont turn this post to immigration as my head hurts

We still have the hydro, the wave and the tidal options, but I really don't know how much they would be able to contribute to the overall demand.

 

[Bahco]

Please dont turn this post to immigration as my head hurts

You are being very selfish Billyo depriving us of our daily helping of immigration!

 

[billyo]

BOLO, thers is a schem to put a bridge across the Morcambe bay linking Lancaster,Morecambe, WITH BARROW IN FURNESS AND SOUTH CUMBRIA, it would be private money and wave power will pay for it ,
trouble is it may only be pie in sky and tax payer may have to bail it out, the cost is megga millions

 

[solo]

But they''ll be able to keep their labour costs down by using cheap East European labour.

 

[Bahco]

But they''ll be able to keep their labour costs down by using cheap East European labour.

I bet you lot can turn a Xmas topic into an immigration topic in less than 3 posts.

 

[Trazor]

But they''ll be able to keep their labour costs down by using cheap East European labour.

Yeaaaahhh.......Another immigration post.......

 

[billyo]

you guys just cant help yourselfs can ya

 

[Space cat]

now that the price of oil is heading to the moon should we embrace nuke power

The price of oil will continue to go up for the simple reason that there is less and less of it. Coal will follow later - quite a lot later - but the final outcome will be the same. Fossil fuels represent solar power in the bank and there is no overdraft facility. At some point they will become too valuable to burn.

Do we embrace nuclear power? Lets look at the alternatives. There are ultimately only three of them.

1) Solar power: This is nuclear but it's at a safe distance (for the moment) and we won't have to decommission it! The potential for solar power is enormous. Wind, wave and hydro power are all solar in origin. The snag is that you have to spread your collectors over large areas and they aren't usually where you want the power. The easiest way to collect solar power is to let plants do it. They're already spread over a large area. They build themselves, repair themselves and decommission themselves - and they've been at it for 600 million years so the technology is well proven! Brazilians are running their cars on ethanol. It's an example we could all follow.

2) Geothermal power: As with solar power, this is also nuclear and the potential is enormous. The problem is getting at it because there aren't many places which offer even remotely easy access. Europe's biggest potential source is 600 miles out in the North Atlantic! The Americans and Japanese are luckier. The technology is still in its infancy but if we can put a man on the moon we can surely put a machine a mile underground.

3) The moon: Tidal power stations run on the moon's kinetic energy. This is the only way to get at it because the energy reaches us through gravity and the only way to tap into gravity is to let it move some mass. The only moving mass big enough to be useful is in the oceans. Tidal power stations do work but they have to be big and the biggest we have aren't big enough. Forget about river estuaries. If you're going to do this properly you need a dam right across the top of the North Sea! (The Americans can put theirs across the Gulf of Mexico.)

Those natural energy sources will, if we harvest them properly, sustain Life on Earth as we know it but they won't get us past Pluto. I will take it as given that, despite the world shortage of dilithium, we humans will some day venture out of our own solar system. For this we will need nuclear power. Fission is too dirty so it will be fusion or else something as yet unknown. When we do get it sorted out - as I'm sure we will - I expect we'll be just as wasteful with it as we've been with the fossil fuels. Questions will be asked at the UN: "Does the honorable member for East Antarctica realize how little deuterium we have left?", whereupon Pacific Nationalist Party members will all giggle.

 

[Steve]

You mention ethanol. I recall reading somewhere that to run all the cars in the world would require plantations the size of the entire surface of the planet. Something of this magnitude anyway, it just isn't feasible.

 

[solo]

How about duracell bunnies on a treadmill?

 

[joe-90]

Civilisation as we know it is built upon CHEAP oil. When the stuff starts to run out or demand can't be satiated then that will lead to a depression that makes the 30s look like the good old days.
The bad news gets much worse. it is a depression that will last for the whole of our lifetimes.
Don't let anyone kid you - there is NO alternative fuel - and there never will be.

Do a Google for 'Peak Oil' and panic.

 

[Shutpa]

Space cat wrote: " Tidal power stations do work but they have to be big and the biggest we have aren't big enough".

Have been to the River Rance power station in France a couple of times and got the impression that the French are more than happy with the output (about 0.01 of total electrical energy consumption in France).

The Golf of Mexico and the North Sea are a little larger than the usual sites suggested (Pentland Firth, Channel Islands and Strait of Gib.).

 

[Space cat]

You mention ethanol. I recall reading somewhere that to run all the cars in the world would require plantations the size of the entire surface of the planet.

I haven't heard that but I haven't heard anything to the contrary either. There are no easy answers. To get the full benefit of photosynthesis we'll have to use plants more efficiently. I believe the Brazilian ethanol is obtained by fermenting sugar but that's only a small part of the energy in a plant. The bulk of it is in the form of cellulose which is just polymerized sugar. Brewers' yeast can't touch it but there are bacteria that can.

We'll need lots of plants in lots of places. There's a lot of plankton in the oceans. We might also consider using our cars less often. I go four miles to work each day on a bike.

The Golf of Mexico and the North Sea are a little larger than the usual sites suggested

I was being facetious but you never know. I'd be surprized if there wasn't at least one US power company eyeing up the Gulf of Mexico.

PS: I've heard that the French tidal power station has slowed the Earths's rotation by a small but measurable amount.