YOU: Fix the US Energy Crisis

[mheslep]

Yes I've been following some of the efforts: inorganic w/ Lewis (CalTech) and Nocera (MIT); biologic w/ Joule Unlimited and Venter. Lewis has already identified materials efficient and cheap but not robust to the corrosive environment of hydrolysis. Nature deals w/ the same problem by continually rebuilding the photoplasts, if at some energy cost.

For this reason I favor the biologic solution from Joule w/ its direct hydrocarbon engineered organism. Their approach eliminates the harvest and lipid conversion step (direct conversion), eliminates the 'gunk' build up associated with algae that has crashed some prototype systems, eliminates biomass feed stock transport problems, eliminates the fresh water resource problem (at least 19 mbbl/day) associated with all other biofuel efforts. Joule claims they can do 20,000 gallons/acre-year of hydrocarbon in a peer reviewed journal. They rely on bio-solar enclosures which has proved too expensive in the past, so they have that hill to climb.* If they succeed, then 7 million acres replaces all US oil imports, 15 million replaces all US oil period. That's a fraction of the land dedicated to just US corn ethanol in 2011.

*For instance, if the cost target is $2/gal, then they have to build an acre of enclosures, operate, and pay land taxes off $40,000/acre/year. If the cost of the enclosure is only $2/sq ft then an acre of enclosure costs $86K. Of course farmers make a living off $1000/acre/year, but they don't have to cover the dirt with plexiglass.

PS: The above is, I think, the best approach for liquid fuels. I still favor electrified, battery based, transportation over combustion and its inevitable byproducts whenever possible.

 

[turbo]

My wife and I are "fixing" the energy crisis in our own way. We burn properly seasoned wood in an efficient steel, fire-brick lined stove. I have never had to clean the chimney, because the hot fires strip out all the tar and creosote.

This weekend, we are replacing the last two problematic windows with brand-new double-hung windows with vinyl frames and IR-reflective glass. Winter is a good time to do such replacements, since the companies that do that sort of work are always looking for ways to keep their employees busy in the slack season.

My wife and I bought this place 6 years ago and had the oil tank filled because we didn't have a decent supply of seasoned hardwood at the time. We still have over 1/4 of that tank of oil, and I have been nursing it along with 911 to avoid sludge. We are using the furnace on cold nights (especially when I'm not feeling well, which is frequently recently) trying to draw down that tank. Eventually, I'll order maybe 100 gallons of oil, and who knows how long that will last...

 

[mheslep]

My wife and I are "fixing" the energy crisis in our own way. We burn properly seasoned wood in an efficient steel, fire-brick lined stove. I have never had to clean the chimney, because the hot fires strip out all the tar and creosote.

This weekend, we are replacing the last two problematic windows with brand-new double-hung windows with vinyl frames and IR-reflective glass. Winter is a good time to do such replacements, since the companies that do that sort of work are always looking for ways to keep their employees busy in the slack season.

My wife and I bought this place 6 years ago and had the oil tank filled because we didn't have a decent supply of seasoned hardwood at the time. We still have over 1/4 of that tank of oil, and I have been nursing it along with 911 to avoid sludge. We are using the furnace on cold nights (especially when I'm not feeling well, which is frequently recently) trying to draw down that tank. Eventually, I'll order maybe 100 gallons of oil, and who knows how long that will last...

What kind of wall construction/insulation do you have? Any upgrades planned? I've upgraded my windows too, and air sealed the attic, but I can't find away to easily upgrade 2x4 framed w/ cedar shingle walls to the new super insulated design (double wall or 2x6). Might as well knock the place down first. Meanwhile an IR temperature gun shows a lot cold temps on those walls.

 

[turbo]

What kind of wall construction/insulation do you have? Any upgrades planned? I've upgraded my windows too, and air sealed the attic, but I can't find away to easily upgrade 2x4 framed w/ cedar shingle walls to the new super insulated design (double wall or 2x6). Might as well knock the place down first. Meanwhile an IR temperature gun shows a lot cold temps on those walls.

We live in a house made of ~6" poplar logs. We added 1" of foam insulation to the roof before installing a metal roof.

Sometimes, it would be nice to have the place a little bit warmer in the winter without stoking the stove, but adding studs and insulation to the outer walls would destroy the appearance of the place. As it is, I have to be careful not to stoke the stove when the outside temperature is freezing or higher, because it gets really hot in here. Extra insulation would require us to buy a much smaller wood-stove to avoid getting roasted out.

I enjoy splitting, stacking and seasoning hardwood that has only sequestered carbon for maybe 40 years instead of burning #2 heating oil (~$3.60/gallon right now). I could cut the wood off our 10 acres, but I prefer to buy the wood from my niece's husband, who runs a bulk-firewood operation in the spring/summer. That saves me a lot of work and risk. My footing is not so great after I had a stroke, so running a screaming chainsaw on steep side-hills (about the only terrain on our property) is not an attractive option.

 

[mheslep]

As it is, I have to be careful not to stoke the stove when the outside temperature is freezing or higher, because it gets really hot in here. Extra insulation would require us to buy a much smaller wood-stove to avoid getting roasted out.

You might consider an HRV for that problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation
Sealed up homes still need to turn the air over, and I expect you'll get a more even room temp as a benefit. Not sure how much duct work you'd need to add.

 

[turbo]

The only duct-work we have is connected to the oil furnace, and this place is so small that ducting would be overkill. We burn less than 5 cords of seasoned hardwood/year, so our heating energy costs are negligible. As summers have gotten hotter and hotter, we need more air-conditioning, but hopefully the new windows will cut back that cost, too.

My youngest uncle is a (semi-retired) HVAC guy, and he's pretty darned sharp. When he saw these last two problematic windows, he said "Replace them, and they'll pay for themselves in a few years." I know he's right, and shouldn't have waited this long to swap them out, but there always seemed to be other priorities cropping up. Still, replacing drafty old windows pays more than keeping money in savings accounts.

 

[Artus]

It's official now. We have passed the Peak Oil and there is not evident solution:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/01/nature-journal-study-peak-oil/

 

[Ryan_m_b]

It's official now. We have passed the Peak Oil and there is not evident solution:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/01/nature-journal-study-peak-oil/

It is neither "official" nor clear. These arguments have happened before, we should wait until it is clear to conclude or discuss the rationale for the recent conclusions, not take them as fact.

 

[Most Curious]

Lift ALL restrictions on oil and gas production / refining nationwide.

CEASE all exports of energy. To include crude and refined product as well as gas. Possible exception for batteries.

Eliminate trading of ALL futures contracts of energy.

Defund the EPA and scatter those responsible for the outrageous damage they have done!.

Cease all "alternative energy" dreams and subsidies, including tax breaks. All research to be privately funded. I wish them well but see no need to fund their pipe dreams.

Kill all building of hybrid cars which in fact ADD to pollution.

Suspend the clean air act until such time as all job killing, cost increasing provisons are removed.

Eliminate all efficiency standards for things like vehicles, light bulbs, home heating etc.

Remove alcohol contamination from gasoline and bio contamination from diesel fuel.

Give a tax break for construction of new coal fired generating plants and advanced nuclear plants. To aid construction, eliminate income taxes for those working on the projects.

IMMEDIATELY resume nuclear fuel reprocessing for the valuable material otherwise wasted and to reduce the volume of high level waste to be stored.

Build such new electrical transmission lines as necessary. Grant maximum of 14 days for all NIMBY actions and hearings. No more roadblocks to sighting of transmission lines, coal and nuclear plants, refineries and nuclear waste disposal sites to name only a few.

Am I serious?? You better believe I am! Our "energy crisis" has been created by politics. Our current economic funk can also be traced to the treasonous acts of the EPA, DOE and congress to mention only a few of the crimminals involved.

 

[Abraham]

Lift ALL restrictions on oil and gas production / refining nationwide.

CEASE all exports of energy. To include crude and refined product as well as gas. Possible exception for batteries.

Eliminate trading of ALL futures contracts of energy.

Defund the EPA and scatter those responsible for the outrageous damage they have done!.

Cease all "alternative energy" dreams and subsidies, including tax breaks. All research to be privately funded. I wish them well but see no need to fund their pipe dreams.

Kill all building of hybrid cars which in fact ADD to pollution.

Suspend the clean air act until such time as all job killing, cost increasing provisons are removed.

Eliminate all efficiency standards for things like vehicles, light bulbs, home heating etc.

Remove alcohol contamination from gasoline and bio contamination from diesel fuel.

Give a tax break for construction of new coal fired generating plants and advanced nuclear plants. To aid construction, eliminate income taxes for those working on the projects.

IMMEDIATELY resume nuclear fuel reprocessing for the valuable material otherwise wasted and to reduce the volume of high level waste to be stored.

Build such new electrical transmission lines as necessary. Grant maximum of 14 days for all NIMBY actions and hearings. No more roadblocks to sighting of transmission lines, coal and nuclear plants, refineries and nuclear waste disposal sites to name only a few.

Am I serious?? You better believe I am! Our "energy crisis" has been created by politics. Our current economic funk can also be traced to the treasonous acts of the EPA, DOE and congress to mention only a few of the crimminals involved.

Everything will come at the cost of the environment. I don't think eliminating those who oversee the protection of it---however muddled or inefficient these departments are---will help us survive as a species. I'd rather live in the dark and breathe clean air, than live in "modernity" and breathe the poisoned air.

An important question is why we have a looming energy crisis at all. Perhaps we should find an answer to a lifestyle crisis that is clearly driving an energy crisis. Just a thought.

 

[Topher925]

An important question is why we have a looming energy crisis at all. Perhaps we should find an answer to a lifestyle crisis that is clearly driving an energy crisis. Just a thought.

I've thought about this a lot. There was never an energy crisis 200 year ago because people lived different lifestyles and the technology which consumes large amounts of energy hadn't been created yet. Solving the energy crisis is rather simple, just revert back to the lifestyles of Ben Franklin and its problem solved. This would obviously never happen but I think it is a very practical solution.

This of course raises another question; is it really worth doing? Man kinds time on Earth is finite no matter which way you look at it. Is it better for humanity to exist as long as possible, or to achieve as much as possible. Without the consumption of energy and pollution of the planet we would never go to Mars, there would be no LHC, and we would have to give up on our search for a theory of everything.

I think there's a practical solution somewhere there in the middle but there's no telling if we'll ever find it.

 

[mheslep]

There were energy crises hundreds of years ago. People denuded the forests of Europe for fuel and building materials, and were well on the way to doing so in the Americas until Coal came along. In the early 19th century it was said that a man had to travel 50 miles from Boston center to find a tree fell-able for firewood.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

This of course raises another question; is it really worth doing? Man kinds time on Earth is finite no matter which way you look at it. Is it better for humanity to exist as long as possible, or to achieve as much as possible. Without the consumption of energy and pollution of the planet we would never go to Mars, there would be no LHC, and we would have to give up on our search for a theory of everything.

I think there's a practical solution somewhere there in the middle but there's no telling if we'll ever find it.

I think the interesting point to think about is if it is possible to build a clean, sustainable, high energy civilisation without going through the dirty, non-sustainable phase. I'm not so sure however we could have done a better job already, we could have converted mainly to nuclear power and mass produced renewables for example.

Inevitably we will have to convert to a clean, sustainable and high energy system. Clean because we don't want to cause any more ecological damage (for practical and aesthetic reasons), sustainable because if not we just delay the problem and high energy because we have to maintain our current level of infrastructure as well as coping with the developing world electrifying.

On the subject of growing levels and ease of renewable power according to this new scientist article the cost of solar panels have quartered in the last four years. This doesn't surprise me as in the UK there's been something of a gold rush for home solar power, a few years ago the only solar panels I saw on buildings were corporate show-offs or university institutions. Now there are solar panelled roofs everywhere, there are probably a few dozen in my small town alone. It doesn't sound like much (and it's not) but the cost is now low enough for the above average wealth family and if they keep coming down soon it will be affordable for the majority of people. Obviously there are problems with solar power like not producing power at night or on a cloudy day but it is a great supplement and an intensive for people to nail the storage problem.

 

[mheslep]

Part of that solar expansion in the UK must be due to the UK's large solar feed-in tariff. The cost of PV panels have dropped by ~half in the developed world over the past four years, but not the installed cost and not the cost per kWh (though they too are falling), especially not in the higher latitudes. London's year round average daily insolation is ~2.7 kWh/M^2, compared to ~7-8 kWh/M^2 in Phoenix. Furthermore London gathers most of that energy during its long summer days, and in the winter collection falls off to nothing, up to 40X less than in the summer, unlike Phoenix. I agree the solution is storage as Ryan says, but currently long term storage is much more cost effective with solar thermal-hot water than PV.

 

[Topher925]

There were energy crises hundreds of years ago. People denuded the forests of Europe for fuel and building materials, and were well on the way to doing so in the Americas until Coal came along. In the early 19th century it was said that a man had to travel 50 miles from Boston center to find a tree fell-able for firewood.

I did not know this. OK, guess there's only one solution then. Massive population reduction of man kind. So who wants to start WWIII?

 

[Topher925]

I think the interesting point to think about is if it is possible to build a clean, sustainable, high energy civilisation without going through the dirty, non-sustainable phase. I'm not so sure however we could have done a better job already, we could have converted mainly to nuclear power and mass produced renewables for example.

I think converting mainly to nuclear and mass producing renewable energy farms is what we should have been doing once we realized the implications of fossil fuels. It would be nice if we could even start doing that now but things seem to be going in the opposite direction. Japan and Germany are planning on completely eliminating nuclear power and replacing it with coal for the short term. I wonder what their plan is if renewable sources don't come to fruition in the next 15 years.

 

[mheslep]

I did not know this. OK, guess there's only one solution then. Massive population reduction of man kind. So who wants to start WWIII?

Which would do what, take the developed world back to 19th century technology and population where the answer was to mow down the natural landscape? I think the best approach is to get the developed world on the same track as the developed: trending down in energy use per head.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...region&tstart=950504400000&tend=1234587600000

I'd also like to see fossil fuel energy use per capita in developed countries, which must be falling even faster.

 

[Jakoeb]

Which would do what, take the developed world back to 19th century technology and population where the answer was to mow down the natural landscape? I think the best approach is to get the developed world on the same track as the developed: trending down in energy use per head.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...region&tstart=950504400000&tend=1234587600000

I'd also like to see fossil fuel energy use per capita in developed countries, which must be falling even faster.

Yeah maybe the WW3 is not a real option here. But the fact is that there's just going to be too many of us in a couple of decades or a century. Sooner or later we're going to have force some kind of population control laws. For example in China, parents are only allowed to have one child. IMO, that's the way to go.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Yeah maybe the WW3 is not a real option here. But the fact is that there's just going to be too many of us in a couple of decades or a century. Sooner or later we're going to have force some kind of population control laws. For example in China, parents are only allowed to have one child. IMO, that's the way to go.

I doubt this will be necessary. Population booms and constant growth are a characteristic of developing countries. In undeveloped countries mortality is very high, in developed countries the need for many children, the price of raising children, widespread contraception and (most importantly IMO) equal rights for women.

All that is needed to decrease population growth to near nothing is to establish these things.

 

[mheslep]

...But the fact is that there's just going to be too many of us in a couple of decades or a century. Sooner or later we're going to have force some kind of population control laws. For example in China, parents are only allowed to have one child. IMO, that's the way to go.

I disagree:
http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...90000000&tend=1298869200000&hl=en_US&dl=en_US

Replacement birth rate is 2.1

 

[Topher925]

Which would do what, take the developed world back to 19th century technology and population where the answer was to mow down the natural landscape? I think the best approach is to get the developed world on the same track as the developed: trending down in energy use per head.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...region&tstart=950504400000&tend=1234587600000

I'd also like to see fossil fuel energy use per capita in developed countries, which must be falling even faster.

I was just joking about the WWIII thing. Obviously that would not be a good solution. But what do you mean by "developed" country? Are you referring to a developed country like France or a developed country like China?

 

[Topher925]

I disagree:
http://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...90000000&tend=1298869200000&hl=en_US&dl=en_US

Replacement birth rate is 2.1

Your graph only accounts for some of the worlds most developed countries, not all of them. Fact is that many researches in the field of sustainability anticipate the world population to be unsustainable around 2030.

 

[mheslep]

I was just joking about the WWIII thing. Obviously that would not be a good solution.

Yes I know, my target was more the often expressed idea that all would be well with energy needs if the world just returned to its 18th-19th century behavior.

But what do you mean by "developed" country? Are you referring to a developed country like France or a developed country like China?

Developed, as in little or no abject poverty - France, not China.

 

[brerabbit]

Set goals, ie:

1. Operating WarExperientialal Fusion Reactor near Hoover Dam grid by 2017 and ITER in France.

2. Ten updated Warm/Iron Fusion Reactors at Main Electrical Grid Nodes in US. 2027.

3. 75% Federal Energy Dept budget and Research Constructed to fund this effort.

4. Refunds to National Debt made if goals met by 2027.

HOW TO SAVE OUR ECONOMY
by Joe Shea
American Reporter Correspondent
Bradenton, Fla.
http://www.american-reporter.com/4,403/458.html ...And like the Internet once did, they can save the American economy - this time for good. Now there is a greater imperative than there has ever been to adopt and fund them: without such a boon, we will become a bankrupt nation, unfathomably deep in debt to China and other trading partners. Those in power have a hard, cold choice: take what the good Lord has given us in these new technologies, and abandon those that have failed and polluted this lovely planet, or die as other civilizations have, in debt, desolation and disgrace. Those are choices that separate the real patriots from the flingers of rhetoric and defenders of the status quo.

Too many people presume that putting the oil industry out of business would be a terrible thing. That's not true. With a new source of electricity that is pretty close to free, hundreds of thousands of small businesses would spring up overnight, both to replicate the technology under license and to develop new applications for it.

In turn, that would stimulate jobs for hundreds of thousands of well-educated engineers and millions of people who will assemble these devices from newly-manufactured parts. Finally, energy-intensive businesses that have gone broke on $3 gas can spring back to life without that burden of cost and maintenance.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Set goals, ie:

Operating Warm Experental Fusion Reactor near Hoover Dam grid by 2017 and ITER in France.

Ten updated Warm/Iron Fusion Reactors at Main Elictrical Grid Nodes in US. 2027.

Somewhat unfortunately this is highly unlikely. By 2017 construction of ITER http://www.iter.org/proj/iterandbeyond. Also ITER is only a step towards commercial fusion, it's meant to be followed up by DEMO that hasn't even started its design phase yet.

Sadly commercial fusion is still years away.

 

[brerabbit]

Somewhat unfortunately this is highly unlikely. By 2017 construction of ITER http://www.iter.org/proj/iterandbeyond. Also ITER is only a step towards commercial fusion, it's meant to be followed up by DEMO that hasn't even started its design phase yet.

Sadly commercial fusion is still years away.

thanx, Ryan

I absolutely agree. ...but that is the problem. Nobody has a sense of urgency! Pres Kennedy set us us on a impossible goal to go to the moon and return on the Soviet Union urgency of Sputnik. Now the urgency is mired down but is known that we are running out of fossil fuel and the other options are filthy. We need to kick the Universities and Government sponsored 75% of their research dollars are to be spent on Fusion until the goals are met.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

thanx, Ryan

I absolutely agree. ...but that is the problem. Nobody has a sense of urgency! Pres Kennedy set us us on a impossible goal to go to the moon and return on the Soviet Union urgency of Sputnik. Now the urgency is mired down but is known that we are running out of fossil fuel and the other options are filthy. We need to kick the Universities and Government sponsored 75% of their research dollars are to be spent on Fusion until the goals are met.

75% is a bit excessive, for all we know all that would achieve is for us to find out slightly faster that there are more obstacles that we haven't taken into account and that we are further away from fusion than we thought. Personally if we in the developed world were going to spend massive amounts of money on energy we would be better off investing in things we know that work like the latest generation of nuclear reactors, biofuel, renewables and energy reduction methods like passive housing.

 

[Topher925]

thanx, Ryan

I absolutely agree. ...but that is the problem. Nobody has a sense of urgency! Pres Kennedy set us us on a impossible goal to go to the moon and return on the Soviet Union urgency of Sputnik. Now the urgency is mired down but is known that we are running out of fossil fuel and the other options are filthy. We need to kick the Universities and Government sponsored 75% of their research dollars are to be spent on Fusion until the goals are met.

The space race was largely fueled by fear, not ambition. That element of fear and communism isn't part of today's energy crisis. Everyone knew that the US was in an undeclared war of science with the USSR and that the development of nuclear arms and other advanced technological weapons would decide the victor. But with the energy crisis, people only care about how much cash they have to give to the Saudi's for their oil, not if they will get nuked by them. The majority of the population doesn't even think climate change is real. There's just not enough motivation form the general populous to pursue fusion at the same scale of the Apollo missions. But that's not to say that their shouldn't be.

If there was some sort of large catastrophic event, perhaps natural disasters, that could be directly tied to climate change or the energy crisis then you would probably see the government and the public show a serious interest in the situation. But we've already had massive oil spills and the warmest and coldest winter on record (depending on where you live) and all that came out of it is just some people complaining.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

There's just not enough motivation form the general populous to pursue fusion at the same scale of the Apollo missions. But that's not to say that their shouldn't be.

Applying this to energy in general the majority of people probably do not even realize that there is an energy crisis to avoid. They may hear that we've only got X years of fossil fuels left but what they hear from the media is contradictory regarding how long left and what the alternatives are (witness the strong anti-nuclear sentiments that most western countries have).

What might change this is rising fuel costs. In the UK energy costs became a rather important political issue over the winter with several scandalous reports about the increase upon increase that consumers are receiving. A lot of the argument so far has surrounded the profit margins of the energy companies however it could be that as this trend continues eventually people put less energy into arguing about profit margins and face the inevitable issue of increasingly scarce and hard-to-reach fuels. Eventually the economic impact of this on the public may galvanise political opinion.

Regarding public opinion and politics in general on big issues I always feel that it's one of slow/no change followed by massive/quick change once critical mass of "something-must-be-done" is reached. Not enough people care and care not enough about tackling present and future energy demands for it to be a big political issue. That will change but unfortunately probably long after something could have been done to avoid hardship.

 

[mheslep]

Yes I think the UK is the country farthest out on point and will be the one to watch as a predictor of how to proceed. North Sea oil and gas has declined substantially. The UK was self sufficient in gas a few years ago and now imports 40%. UK energy imports tripled in a 5-6 year period.