YOU: Fix the US Energy Crisis

[mheslep]

Issue as I see it is lack of energy independence.

My favored solution is what some call the Matt Simmons plan (see Ocean Energy Institute) which is
1) off shore wind powered electrical generators up and down both the west and east coast
2) on shore wind up and down the middle of the country
3) PV solar in the southwest
4) oil from algea in the southeast

Before paying them, have you given any thought to how those sources work technically, e.g. when the wind doesn't blow, when the sun doesn't shine?

 

[PhilKravitz]

Before paying them, have you given any thought to how those sources work technically, e.g. when the wind doesn't blow, when the sun doesn't shine?

I like storage of the energy in the form of hydrogen from water+electric+catalyst. Which is getting easier thanks to the work of the folks at MIT.

 

[Topher925]

I like storage of the energy in the form of hydrogen from water+electric+catalyst. Which is getting easier thanks to the work of the folks at MIT.

While I do firmly believe in a hydrogen based economy, there are still a lot of issues to be worked out. The folks at MIT did (somewhat accidentally) find a way to electrolyze water efficiently but that doesn't mean its applicable to full scale industrial applications. AFAIK, things like durability, cost, and purity still need to be addressed with that technique.

As of right now, the only commercially available methods of large scale energy storage is with flywheels and thermal reservoirs used by solar thermal power plants.

Interesting factoid: Humanity doesn't have an energy supply problem. By constructing solar thermal or photovoltaic solar energy farms over just 1% of the land in the Sahara Desert, we could supply all of the worlds energy with essentially no pollution. The problem that we needs to be solved is an energy distribution problem.

 

[mheslep]

As of right now, the only commercially available methods of large scale energy storage is with flywheels and thermal reservoirs used by solar thermal power plants.

And hydro.

 

[Topher925]

And hydro.

Woops, forgot about that one.

 

[PhilKravitz]

Yes hydro is fine but pretty much fully developed in the US. Some options in Canada if you are willing to violate the rights of the original owns and push them out.

 

[mheslep]

Yes hydro is fine but pretty much fully developed in the US...

With regards to hydro electric power and storage:
1) All existing hydro, some 8% of total US electric power capacity, can be used to store energy. That is, while solar or wind is online hydro can be (and is) simply idled, allowing water to backup and its potential energy is used later when needed.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity" , ~3% of US electric power capacity, can be installed nearly anywhere there's a hill large enough hold a lake, i.e. with sufficient elevation. It does not require a large natural water source.

This is not say that pumped storage hydro is a blanket solution to the energy storage problem presented by large scale use of intermittent power sources likes wind and solar, but it certainly can help.

 

[PhilKravitz]

With regards to hydro electric power and storage:
1) All existing hydro, some 8% of total US electric power capacity, can be used to store energy. That is, while solar or wind is online hydro can be (and is) simply idled, allowing water to backup and its potential energy is used later when needed.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity" , ~3% of US electric power capacity, can be installed nearly anywhere there's a hill large enough hold a lake, i.e. with sufficient elevation. It does not require a large natural water source.

This is not say that pumped storage hydro is a blanket solution to the energy storage problem presented by large scale use of intermittent power sources likes wind and solar, but it certainly can help.

#1 is a super good idea that I have never heard before. Is it yours? If so get it out in the public it is good.

#2 yes I like pumped hydro storage. In fact Astor (yes the guy who drowned on the Titanic) wrote a book in 1895 (yes 18!) that proposed pumped hydro storage! The book is "A Journey in Other Worlds" it is mostly about a trip to Saturn and the dinosaurs they find there but along the way he make some comments on energy systems that are 100 years ahead of his time.

 

[mheslep]

#1 is a super good idea that I have never heard before. Is it yours?

Storing power until needed later through hydro has been around as long as there has been hydro.

 

[PhilKravitz]

So between hydro and hydrogen we have storage taken care of. :)

Now all we have to do is figure out how much money (work and natural resources) it will take to build the system. ;)

 

[mheslep]

So between hydro and hydrogen we have storage taken care of. :)

You didn't here that from me; again:

This is not say that pumped storage hydro is a blanket solution to the energy storage problem presented by large scale use of intermittent power sources likes wind and solar, but it certainly can help.

 

[PhilKravitz]

OK how much of the storage issue is covered by hydro and hydrogen? Anybody know? How will we find out?

 

[Topher925]

OK how much of the storage issue is covered by hydro and hydrogen? Anybody know? How will we find out?

Probably not. We will find out when someone does a study of it.

 

[olguinma]

Towards Nuclear Fusion: Cobalt properties (specifically of its usage at different temperatures, not the usual).

 

[Topher925]

I'll be keeping a close eye on this one.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-hydrogen-storage-material-added-fuel.html

 

[Artus]

Another problem is to create parts and devices without having oil involved. Every part and machine involved must be created with oil substitutes (e.g. no plastics). If you develop a new energetic system but you need oil to build it or transport the parts, then you're not solving the problem.

 

[kland1]

We always have threads on various pieces of the puzzle, but what I want here is for people to post a coherent plan of how to fix the energy problems we have in the US (and critique what others propose). Some groundrules:

First, though most would agree there are issues, people won't necessarily agree on what they are/what the most important are. So define the problem as you see it before proposing the solution. The usual suspects are: safety, capacity, pollution, cost, future availability of resources, and foreign dependence. Obviously, feel free to modify that list.

Second, I want specific, coherent plans. Don't just say 'reduce CO2 emissions' or 'increase production' - tell me how.

Third, money is important, but not critical (for this thread), so don't let it constrain your ambition. I want solutions that will work - paying for them is another matter. Obviously, any solution will require making tough choices and (in the short term, anyway) spending a lot of money. No need to build a new budget to support it. If you say you want to spend a trillion dollars a year, fine (but the benefit had better be big).

http://www.agmrc.org/markets/info/energyoverview.pdf is a site from another thread with some background info on what we use for what.

I'll go first...

Hello Russ and fellow contributors, I think your question is great!

In 2006 I got the insane idea of purchasing a boat, she's 177' long 42' beam, all steel, end of WWII F/S class ship really. When I got her it was with a general idea of helping to save the oceans with her as a research vessel. Now you ask what in the world does this have to do with fixing anything related to energy right, well here's how.

After getting her and learning all about what makes her run, probably should have done that before getting her; she has seven diesel engines, holds 65,000 US gallons of diesel, burns around 800 us gallons a day when under full cruising speed (around 12.5 knots) and over a 42 week work year generates around 700 tons of emissions, "pollution".

Two problems for a ocean saving vessel, one is it cost a condo every time she gets fueled up and two she pollutes to high heaven, not very Earth friendly.

So, I started looking into ways of running her with lower cost fuel and with hopefully near zero emissions. After five years of research and a bunch of hard work I have a working 125KW prototype electric generation plant that runs on H2O2, and will be running on waste oil. http://www.seabirdadventure.com/tesla-turbine-projects

How does this help, by building a electric power plant that runs on H2O2 and waste oils? H2O2 is a renewable resource and easily made while waste oil is currently being stored and improperly disposed of. http://www.seabirdadventure.com/waste-oil-as-a-fuel-source

The idea is to build three power plants of 850KW each to run the Seabird at full cruising speed while using a waste product and creating zero emissions. That comes out to a little more the 2.4 million watts of electricity, to make a comparison a 3500 sqft house uses about 80KW per day so these power plants would power about 30 homes with AC running and all their lights on.

Now granted that over time as waste oil is eliminated from society this solution would not help much but right now the US gathers and stores around 1.2 billions gallons of waste oil per year with 800 million gallons being disposed of improperly.

Please let me know what you think, thanks

Kris

 

[Buckleymanor]

Storing power until needed later through hydro has been around as long as there has been hydro.

Here is one or two built earlier.http://www.fhc.co.uk/

 

[stonecoldgen]

More government funding for universities to make researches on things such as energy density/biofuels/plasma energy sources/etc.

The US is mostly a flat territory, making cars use natural gas instead of gasoline something serious, shouldn't be a problem, start selling only fluorescent bulbs, shouldn't be something hard to do as well

The US should leave 3rd world countries alone and don't depend so much on that, yeah, that would not follow the ''superpower'' ideal americans have, but i don't care

organize campaigns, concerts, etc. to promote the green-thinking

eventhough US is the paradise for capitalists, it should lower though, capitalism causes consumism and consumism causes a lot of damage to nature

 

[Shifty8]

I've written an article about this a while ago, funny to find this discussion going on while I was looking for something completely different.

First of all, I'm not a sceptic, nor a scientist, and my main language sure aint english. I'm just trying to be realistic a give my view on this matter, so bare with me.

In my opinion there are some mayor flaws in how the general public looks at alternative energy sources, which may very well be the result of our governments or the large oil companies behind them. A real soltion in my opinion lies in a Technique yet to be dicovered or perfected, while most of us think we can do it with the techniques we allready have. I'll elaborate on this later on.

We are never going to switch to a completely different source of energy in a realistic amount of time, without certains parties benefitting or at least not being disadvantaged by it. When a brilliant scientist finds a solution for all of our energy problems today (for example discovers some sort of perpetuum mobilae), he will be dead tomorrow. Such a solution would destroy our economies, which are driven by oil. Hence the need for a solution that doesn't disadvantage the oil-companies or at least tries to prevent them from going bust.

To cut things short, I believe a solution would be found in a combination of techniques over a period of time. In a first phase we would need to reduce our current trend in polluting our planet and reduce the trend of our energy consumption from materials that are bound to run out in a short period (oil, coal, gas, etc).
The second phase, which needs to run in parallel with all other phases, is looking for alternative power production methods. This should be a heavilly funded non-stop operation.
The third phase would consist of making the switch to these new techniques. From what is known to me today, I'd say a combination of nuclear Fusion together with Hydrogen is our best bet.

Phase 1: At the present we have a few alternative energy production methods at our disposal. The first step in a long term solution would be to use solutions more, and cut back in waste (both energy waste as waste products like CO2). This in a short term won't solve our problems, but would at atleast make them less pressing, giving us time to come up with a consturctive way of resolving these issues.

Phase 2: In this second stage, which should run parrelel to the other stages, we would need find an alternative energy production method which can sustain our growing energy consumption on the long term. The basic idea that seems to be running arround is that we will all use solar/wind/biomass/hydrogen power over 50 years instead of the conventional coal/nuclear power we use today. I believe this isn't true, I'll elaborate later on. The only viable solution for as far as I know of would be something in the means of Nuclear Fusion. Nuclear Fusion has great potential, and should be ready for use in a matter of years. But as stated before, we won't be able to make a switch any time soon. This in my opinion creates a lot of lag in the development of this technique, hence I must put allot of emphasis on this phase. Looking at the current state of politics (encouraging alternative power, but not putting enough emphasis on a real solution), I am convinced we will not make a shift towards an alternative power supply without certain parties benefitting from it.

In the Third stage we would implement all of the above. This is where things get critical. We need to solve our energy issues, without tearing down multiple economies. So, why not use a combination, like we are allready doing today. The oil companies provide us with the juice required to make our engines and factories work, including production of many oil-based products, while the power companies provide us with the electricity to power our homes and bussinesses. For the sake of our economies, let's try to keep it this way. Give the oil companies a free pass to become the only producers of Hydrogen, give the power companies a free pass to become the only producers of Fusion Power. Production of all other oil-based products can continue by the Oil companies (imo oil has a greater value to us as a raw material for plastics etc anyways compared to a raw material for energy production) The mayor benefit of having a renewable and pritty much unlimited power supply, such as Fusion Power, is it gives us the ability to create large quantaties of Hydrogen. All you need to make large quantaties of Hydrogen is electricity, and lots of it.
Oil companies will be satified since making Hydrogen with electricity is much more cost effective then mining for oil, and we'll just let them sell it from approximately the same price as gas for the starting period (to overcome the costs of making the shift). Power companies will need allot of Funding to make such a shift since constructing, perfecting and maintaining Nuclear Power plants is going to cost allot. But I feel if we would distribute this financial burden ammongst all the population benefitting from it we could make it. Or else the governments should put the taxes on gas to a good use.

Finally an elaboration why I think other techniques lack posibility to become our prime way of harvesting power:
- Solar power, lots of potential since it has a lot of yield, but did you ever think about the environmental issues? I mean, your taking energy out of the environment and returning it in a different state. Harmless on a small scale, but what about large scale implementation? Imo, a great addition to our current energy production methods, but no replacement. Also the storage and unreliability (called night or clouds) of this form of energy is a huge problem.
- Biomass Power, from waste: Excellent idea. From crops specificly grown to produce Biomass, TERRIBLE idea. We'd be better of sending those crops to parts of the world straving...
- Hydro Power, geographicly speaking there aren't enough places to build these power plants to sustain our power consumption in the long term, specially for the smaller flat countries (like the Netherlands where I'm from). Not to mention about their potential impact on the environment.. (Dam's build to create artificial lakes are known to have destroyed complete habbitats etc etc.) Again, a nice addition if the environment permits it.
- Wind Energy, if the wind stops blowing, then so does your energy supply. Basicly the same as Solar energy.
- Hydrogen Energy, has huge potential but should be seen (in my opinion) more as a medium to transport energy, rather then an energy source. The most common way to create Hydrogen resides on Electrolysis, which requires electricity. Any other method also requires energy to make Hydrogen. Theres no viable way of making Hydrogen a power supply at this moment, nor will there ever be because of this simple restraint. Even if microbes were to make hydrogen (the most viable solution imo as of today), it would still require huge microbe farms harvesting the power of the sun to make hydrogen.

I'm eager to hear your opinions and critics on this story, since I'm not in any position to share this story to anyone with ample knowledge. Hence I posted it here.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Given the vast new finds of natural gas in the US,

CADDO PARISH, La. -- A massive natural-gas discovery here in northern Louisiana heralds a big shift in the nation's energy landscape. After an era of declining production, the U.S. is now swimming in natural gas...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124104549891270585.html

solar cracking of methane may provide a viable path to a carbon-free hydrogen supply.

Background – The SOLHYCARB proposal addresses the exploration of an unconventional route for potentially cost effective hydrogen production with solar energy. The novel process thermally decomposes natural gas (NG) in a high temperature chemical reactor heated by concentrated solar energy. This process results in two products: a H2-rich gas and a high-value nano-material, carbon black (CB). H2 is thus produced with renewable energy. Solar energy is stored as a transportable fuel. The fuel has zero CO2 emission: carbon as opposed to CO2 is sequestered. Fossil fuels are saved, and CB is synthesized.

This solar process is described in Figure 1...

http://www.pre.ethz.ch/research/projects/?id=solhycarb

 

[johnbbahm]

I have been thinking Carbon is a good storage method for Hydrogen. I.E. we make our own methane. We already have a natural gas transport and storage technology.
As for as a long term transport solution, think about making the US interstate system a power grid. Technologies are being worked on now which allow electrical power to cross an air gap. If hybrid vehicles had a secondary tuned circuit to receive power from the powered lane, you could cross the country and the electric use be recorded on your cars electric meter. This might be more useful for long haul trucks. Fuel would still be used, but only for local trips, and to and from the interstate.
Other ideas include homeowners leasing their roofs to power companies for solar power generation. Rent is paid in the form of a percent of power generated.
Fixing our energy issues will require thinking way outside the box.

 

[revaredneck]

hello, my name is rodney, and I am not a very school educated person, but more of an experience educated person, so forgive me if my thoughts seem primitive, or immature to a more scholarly individual. i have had many thoughts on the subject of off grid electricty generation, many of the ones out there are pretty expencive to get started, solar? wind? water? everything costs money i know but the thoughts of men can be free.
that in mind; let's look at a different kind of thought.
energy? electricity? pollution? foreign dependency? we need as a country in our country, an electrical generation machine that does not produce polution, independent from need of outside country help, and does not need a specific fuel persay to run.

perpetual motion electricity generation; maybe using pendulums and counter weights, to produce a perpetual motion electricity generating machine. i believe it is not only possible but in reality can be done using a switch to switch counter weight ballances to keep the motion going. when one weight gets to its optimum a switch turns it or switches it to use the other side of a set of weights to keep it in a see saw affect, using gears simular to a grand father clock, only in a large enough scale to turn off set pulleys to turn power generators. using gears and counter weights this concept could and can be a reality. i realize the thoughts on the friction debate, but i believe that if enough people put enough thought into the actual building of this, IT CAN BE feasable.

and to the problem of the case for friction i say one word,... GREASE!

i wish to hear any comments good or bad to my thinking, and again please forgive me for my ignorance. R.E.VanAlstine.

 

[Erk3452]

Um no... That will never happen.

 

[mheslep]

...

perpetual motion electricity generation; maybe using pendulums and counter weights, to produce a perpetual motion electricity generating machine. i believe it is not only possible but in reality can be done using a switch to switch counter weight ballances to keep the motion going. ...

Hello Rodney. That topic is not allowed here.

...Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions
Search PF and you will find many threads that have been closed in a number of forums. As for S&D, any claim of this nature would be reproducible and/or testable by the scientific community; hence there is no need for debate.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2269439&postcount=2

 

[revaredneck]

may i ask why?

 

[russ_watters]

Because it violates the laws of physics and discussing it attracts crackpots.

 

[timthereaper]

General rule: if you think you've disproved the second law of thermodynamics and can get free energy, it's best to just keep that a secret.

As for the energy topic, has anyone done any significant fact-finding into this new thorium-based nuclear reactor business? I've heard it touted as the new "holy grail" for nuclear energy. Also, I've heard that Paul Pantone's GEET system is supposed to revolutionize fueled vehicles. A friend of mine really believes in it, but then again, he's a website designer with no engineering experience. I would like to know if anyone can show that these systems aren't all that they're cracked up to be.

 

[johnbbahm]

I like the idea of PV collectors, and looked into it several years ago. At that time many energy saving items were a better value than PV. Windows, Radiant barrier, better insulation, ect... . I see part of the issue with PV is the payback curve. You are trying to get your house's power usage down to where the area of the roof can collect the average usage. By the time the usage and surface curves cross, the payback is past the life expectancy of the panels.
Another issue I found with PV was purely accounting. In the late 90's none of the factories making panels, were running the factories with their own panels.
If they could not save money by using panels that only cost them their "cost of goods sold--less marketing" How could a homeowner save money paying the full price.
Prices have been coming down, and panels would shade the roof, Grid tied solved the peak vs average issue. Maybe time to revisit.

 

[OmCheeto]

I like the idea of PV collectors

As do I, and my father before me.

, and looked into it several years ago. At that time many energy saving items were a better value than PV. Windows, Radiant barrier, better insulation, ect... .

This is why I invested in OC.

I see part of the issue with PV is the payback curve. You are trying to get your house's power usage down to where the area of the roof can collect the average usage. By the time the usage and surface curves cross, the payback is past the life expectancy of the panels.
Another issue I found with PV was purely accounting.

As it should have been, and should be.

In the late 90's none of the factories making panels, were running the factories with their own panels.

Location, location, location. Solarworld built the largest solar manufacturing http://www.solarworld-usa.com/news-and-resources/news/solarworld-opens-north-americas-largest-solar-cell-manufacturing-facility.aspx" in North America in Oregon. Why? Oregon has abundant fresh water. (That's the reason I heard anyways)

It would be great to make the panels in New Mexico, or southern California, where the sun always shines, but where would you get the water from?

If they could not save money by using panels that only cost them their "cost of goods sold--less marketing" How could a homeowner save money paying the full price.
Prices have been coming down, and panels would shade the roof, Grid tied solved the peak vs average issue. Maybe time to revisit.

Check out https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=324207".

I would explain to him an engineering modification to his existing array to improve his overall system efficiency by 300%, but that would steal all of his fun.

99% of the fun of science is figuring things out for yourself.

---------------------------------
Spock: He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking.
The Borg Queen: You think in such three-dimensional terms. How small you've become.
Me, interpreting how http://www.fritjofcapra.net/" thinks: Imagine the universe, interconnected, in a poly-dimensional web, where everything affects everything.

 

[edpell]

has anyone done any significant fact-finding into this new thorium-based nuclear reactor business?

I have been looking into this for a few months. I have posted a link to a good site on the subject. I can not post the link a second time here because it violates PF rules.

The energy from thorium forum has a lively discussion of thorium reactors. Oak Ridge operated a small thorium reactor for several years in the 60s. The Chinese are currently building a proof of concept thorium reactor. In the US a new company Flibe Energy has been formed to provide thorium reactors to US military bases that want "base islanding" (there own power supply). Two researcher one from Brookhaven National Labs and one from Israel have gotten money from the US Israeli National Science Foundation to study thorium reactors.

So the net is it is an active field. We will see what comes of it in five years.

 

[DrClapeyron]

I was discussing with a co-worker her desire to trade in her mid-size crossover SUV for a full-size SUV. I think she and other people go with the SUV and large vehicles generally because the seats are at hip level and it makes getting things (i.e. kids, etc) in and out easier. Try designing a car, maybe with Goldwing doors or something that allows more access inside the car. That and people are fat here, and here in America that makes SUVs the defacto means of transportation since it is the only way for most people to avoid the humiliation of having to tell your boss you were late to work because you got stuck in your seat while trying to exit your car.

Ok, that was senile.

Red tape. Government puts too much red tape around nuclear power. Sensationalism from Chernobyl, 3 Mile and now Japan means it will not happen in this country. People have too much fear of nuclear power to prevent sending 19 year old kids to their death in Iraq. Ok, a little senile as well.

Maybe congress should take the restrictions off more effecient reactor designs like breeder reactors. I think all the red tape is there to prevent a collapse of the coal industry and, what would be far worse for their pocketbooks, a contraction in the oil industry. Outside of a great new breakthrough in fusion technology all the "alternatives" we have are not alternatives.

They are the status quo. Nuclear energy and PV cells are nothing new so why would anyone consider them "alternatives"?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

U.S. Researcher Preparing Prototype Cars Powered by Heavy-Metal Thorium
http://wardsauto.com/ar/thorium_power_car_110811/
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/8-grams-of-thorium-could-replace-gasoline-in-cars-20110812/

 

[mheslep]

U.S. Researcher Preparing Prototype Cars Powered by Heavy-Metal Thorium
http://wardsauto.com/ar/thorium_power_car_110811/
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/8-grams-of-thorium-could-replace-gasoline-in-cars-20110812/

A 250 MW unit weighing about 500 lbs. (227 kg) would be small and light enough to drop under the hood of a car, he says.

i.e. 336 thousand HP? Under the hood of the Space Shuttle more like it. Sounds like a crackpot link.

 

[RonL]

This is an interesting improvement for transfer of power, the oscillating ring reduces friction to a minimum, close to an electric motor.

http://www.engineair.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=9

30 seconds into the video, channel 10, an actual unit shows the bearings that push the ring into the motion that engages the sliding vanes.

http://www.engineair.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=2&Itemid=11

Ron