tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post115418932833818792..comments2023-11-02T08:21:30.874-04:00Comments on Heigh-ho: An Immodest Proposalspd rdrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154459348618122162006-08-01T15:09:00.000-04:002006-08-01T15:09:00.000-04:00Ok, so we have to gut a few environmental laws to ...Ok, so we have to gut a few environmental laws to save the environment. That is what we are being asked to do in the name of the war on terror as it is (substitute consitution for environmental laws).<BR/><BR/>BFD.KJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13749107853987458250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154419377850162122006-08-01T04:02:00.000-04:002006-08-01T04:02:00.000-04:00"Camojack,That land only LOOKS useless. :)Just wai...<I>"Camojack,<BR/>That land only LOOKS useless. :)<BR/>Just wait until you want to cover it with solar cells, etc. Then you will find out just how valuable it is as 'natural habitat' for endangered species."</I><BR/><BR/>Yeah, I knew that...but it's still a good idea, regardless of what the enviro-nazis may say.camojackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07636605293846764764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154389062537888232006-07-31T19:37:00.000-04:002006-07-31T19:37:00.000-04:00I have no quarrel with building additional nuke pl...I have no quarrel with building additional nuke plants <BR/><BR/>(The only nuke plant I was ever against was the one that, back in the early 1970's, the Long Island Lighting Company wanted to build on, you guessed it, Long Island. LI is, as you probably surmised, is SURROUNDED BY WATER - and, by the way, home to several million people. The problem is that with only a dozen bridges and tunnels providing exit routes, and those being already clogged on a daily basis beyond belief, any "oops" out there at LILCO would inconvenience millions of people, many of whom pull the levers of capitalism in this nation. <BR/><BR/>Of course, times have changed, but if you knew LILCO like I knew LILCO, you would understand my reluctance to give that crew anything more radioactive than a glow stick.)<BR/><BR/>I don't think nukes would go a long way towards cutting pollution and oil consumption caused by motor vehicles, however. Of course, if there was a huge beakthrough in power storage technology, perhaps electric powered vehicles would begin to make sense. Right now, however, the costs (and weight) of electric cars is upside down in terms of power consumption.spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154370662792508372006-07-31T14:31:00.000-04:002006-07-31T14:31:00.000-04:00Pile, I'm all for that. You're 100% correct (but e...Pile, I'm all for that. You're 100% correct (but electricity won't get THAT cheap!) I just don't think it's gonna happen.<BR/>NIMBY, and all that.<BR/><BR/>-Don BrouhahaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154368946603693682006-07-31T14:02:00.000-04:002006-07-31T14:02:00.000-04:00Well as long as I am head safety honky, then yes I...Well as long as I am head safety honky, then yes I am against pickling my liver with methanol. I hate the smell of formaldehyde and I never liked dissections. Now, pickling my liver with ethanol, that is another matter.<BR/><BR/>As safety honky, let me axe you, how many people die every year mining coal? How many people have ever died in the nuclear power industry?<BR/><BR/>If you want a project, let's vow to build 100 new nuclear reactors in the next ten years. Lets make electricity so plentiful and cheap that we can light every city up like Las Vegas. Then, even though we may not go to the moon, the outline of the US will be visible from the moon.Pile On®https://www.blogger.com/profile/13969212407780454348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154367822157943712006-07-31T13:43:00.000-04:002006-07-31T13:43:00.000-04:00Pile:Your just da' man for the job. Get out there ...Pile:<BR/>Your just da' man for the job. Get out there in the garage and start doing your mad scientist stuff. When you come up with the next energy source, I'll help you get a patent.spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154367665363932172006-07-31T13:41:00.000-04:002006-07-31T13:41:00.000-04:00Geez, Pile, are you some sort of safety honky now?...Geez, Pile, are you some sort of safety honky now??<BR/>Let's talk about money pits.<BR/>How many billions spent by Feds on nulcear power research, and how little applied? a lot. Ditto for "fusion power", like that's been promised for 40-plus years now, since I was a kid.<BR/>I agree that the Federal Gov. has an innate ability to waste money on things that can't be successfully commericalized, so we need to get them to focus on something THAT WORKS!<BR/>-Don BrouhahaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154362684112348442006-07-31T12:18:00.000-04:002006-07-31T12:18:00.000-04:00Don, I don't think methanol is any kind of an answ...Don, I don't think methanol is any kind of an answer either. Coal as a source is finite so it isn't too attractive for investment and the liability when peoples livers start metabolizing formaldehyde because of exposure to methanol isn't very attractive either.<BR/><BR/>You guys are looking at the next great source of energy through the lens of the last one. Yes, if it turns out that it has to be distributed in a similar manner than the infrastructure required makes the market impossible for a new small firm with a great idea.<BR/><BR/>But perhaps the next source of energy will be nothing like that?<BR/><BR/>I will go along with you on one point, if government wants to make a push for more research, fine. Do it. There are plenty of great minds at Universities and private sector labs to work on this. <BR/><BR/>Personally I think the answer is more likely to be found by a college drop out physics major in his garage than in a lab of some government/private sector money pit.Pile On®https://www.blogger.com/profile/13969212407780454348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154352349587405462006-07-31T09:25:00.000-04:002006-07-31T09:25:00.000-04:00Camojack,That land only LOOKS useless. :)Just wait...Camojack,<BR/>That land only LOOKS useless. :)<BR/><BR/>Just wait until you want to cover it with solar cells, etc. Then you will find out just how valuable it is as 'natural habitat' for endangered species. I'm sorry, but a solution that involves paving over huge amounts of land for collecting significant amounts of solar energy/electricity probably isn't going to fly.<BR/><BR/>-Don BrouhahaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154339835742758782006-07-31T05:57:00.000-04:002006-07-31T05:57:00.000-04:00Oh no. The ominous tapping foot.Never a good sign....Oh no. The ominous tapping foot.<BR/><BR/>Never a good sign... <BR/><BR/>I'm allowed to enjoy it immensely when someone thinks of something I never would have, even if I've learned through long experience that it's safer to conceal my enjoyment beneath a liberal wrapping of snark.<BR/><BR/>Seriously, this is probably the biggest argument we have around my house. The spouse finds it "unforgivable" that the administration hasn't done more on this front - he maintains if Bush wanted to have a legacy, this was it. I agree this would have been a good starting place but have pointed out that 'something' happened 5 years ago that was mildly distracting.<BR/><BR/>It's all very well to point out that we haven't been attacked since but that is 20/20 hindsight. Had we not reacted the way we did, that might not have been the case. And in any event I look at the industry I'm in and firms are just now emerging from the risk-averse financial crouch they went into post 9/11. Even though numerically speaking 3000 dead wasn't that big a deal, we took a huge psychological hit on that day. <BR/><BR/>Politics is very much the art of the possible. My husband argues we should have used 9/11 as a lever to change our dependence on foreign oil and there is an argument to be made for that (though in the transition we may have created a supply vulnerability in defense and he acknowledges that b/c our military is overwhelmingly dependent on oil).Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154331753433595762006-07-31T03:42:00.000-04:002006-07-31T03:42:00.000-04:00OK, here's another (brilliant) idea; in the Southw...OK, here's another (brilliant) idea; in the Southwest there are <B>huge</B> tracts of relatively useless desert land...which could be utilized to accommodate vast arrays of solar collectors.<BR/><BR/>Of course, more <I>nuclear</I> plants might help, but solar collectors have no radioactive byproducts that require careful disposal...camojackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07636605293846764764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154319898458947542006-07-31T00:24:00.000-04:002006-07-31T00:24:00.000-04:00Don's on board.That's, what, five of us?We've got ...Don's on board.<BR/>That's, what, five of us?<BR/>We've got movement!spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154312561860521372006-07-30T22:22:00.000-04:002006-07-30T22:22:00.000-04:00I hesitate to enter into this argument, because I ...I hesitate to enter into this argument, because I have been involved in this to one degree or another since college, over 30 years ago, and I have some very definite, if unpopular ideas and opinions.<BR/>1) The scale of the problem in the US is very large, growing larger every year. The economical nature of liquid fuels (like gasoline or diesel) preclude a rapid shift to "something else". <BR/>2) The Thermodynamic efficiencies of various "heat engines" is the prime cause. Most large scale electric power plants are only about 34-39% efficient, from a thermodynamic view, because it takes so much "heat" just to get water up to a temperature to do "work"; turning a steam turbine which spins a generator. Internal/external combustion engines are on the order of 60% efficient or better (nowadays) in converting fuel into mechanical energy. Are electric cars re-charged from big power plants really more "efficient"?<BR/>3) Solar energy has several forms: solar panels (don't work when the sun goes down, and don't work well at higher lattitudes for about 1/2 the year); wind power (more promising) but do you want a big windmill farm next door? NIMBY! Still less than a fraction of a percent of total electric power supply.<BR/>Solar power as "biofuels" (corn, biomass, sugar cane, sorghum) has similar limitations: cultivate vast areas of land to collect the "solar energy" and turn it into ethanol? Not really very efficient, there is a big tax subsidy (in the US) involved to make it work. Brazil makes it work (producing ethanol from sugar cane) because they have a hotter, tropical climate (and a smaller number of cars than the US).<BR/>4) Nuclear power: probably the most logical alternative for scaling electrical power supply increases, but big problems with the NIMBY thing. I doubt I'll see a new nuclear plant built in this country in my lifetime (MAYBE one or two, but that would be irrelevant to solving the problem).<BR/>5) Making methanol from coal, methanol as a liquid fuel for cars. Another 'logical' alternative; Dupont has had the technology for years (can even make gasoline from methanol), we've got plenty of domestic coal, but the government has to get behind this one. Portia mentioned the Clinton initiative regarding the "super" high mileage car; she should have also mentioned their choice to promote ethanol over methanol. Ethanol has big support from farm state senators and congressmen, but will never be the "big" answer we need. Methanol from coal COULD be the big answer, but it won't be promoted for a while yet, because it's not as "green" as ethanol and biomass and all the other incremental and marginal approaches.<BR/>Spd rdr is right. We need a national strategy to push a "big" solution, and fairly soon, too. I frankly don't have a lot of faith in the "free market", because it's not exactly free to begin with.<BR/>Most of the big oil companies are all doing research on many of these things, but nobody is going to step off first until they actually have a narket to sell into.<BR/>The big auto companies have been making "experimental" cars for decades, but have no fuel infrastructure to support a new market. <BR/> Chicken or eggs for breakfast? <BR/>There is no solution except to build, and build A LOT of new stuff. We just have to make an intelligent and realistic strategy and follow through with it<BR/><BR/>-Don BrouhahaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154303679422242582006-07-30T19:54:00.000-04:002006-07-30T19:54:00.000-04:00Tapping foot...Tapping foot...spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154288060791255432006-07-30T15:34:00.000-04:002006-07-30T15:34:00.000-04:00God spd.You sound just like my husband. Maybe you ...God spd.<BR/><BR/>You sound just like my husband. Maybe you *do* need to sit down and have a beer with him.<BR/><BR/>Just, for Pete's sake, do <I>not</I> break each other's noses. The thought of that much testosterone (or brain power, for that matter) in one room is more than this poor female can deal with. Be gentle with the less gifted of this world, wouldja?Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154287157998776572006-07-30T15:19:00.000-04:002006-07-30T15:19:00.000-04:00My point, Pile is that unlesss there is a timetabl...My point, Pile is that unlesss there is a timetable no concerted effort will be marshalled. Think of HDTV. It was, what, 10 or 12 years ago when the Government announce that we'd all have HDTV within six years, but the deadline has to keep being extended because the intrenched broadcasters wouldn't pony up the investment to make it happen. Here's a situation where is it the best interest of big oil (and Detroit, to a lesser degree) to fudge progress while at the same time covering themselves in "green." Ethanol? Seriously, what kind of a foll do they take us for not to be able to spot that boondoggle from ten miles away.<BR/><BR/>No, for this project we will need muscle - government muscle - to get the ball rolling. Once the timetable is set, and the technology starts coming into focus, THEN the entrepreneurs will come alive. The project is too big, too expensive, and too unorganized at this moment for serious investment. That would change quickly if industry knew, and could count on, a deadline.<BR/><BR/>Please don't think that I'm some Al Gore looney waiting for the end of timesm, either. I am far more concerned about the power of the Islamofascists and tin-pot gangsters dictating the foreign and domestic policies of these United States than about the ice caps melting. It's not that I don't believe that human endevours contribute to global climate change- crap, one Volcano in the Phillipines can do that - but when I can't see the Blue Ridge Mountains from the beautiful Shennendoah Valley because of the pollution raised by a single road -I-81 - then I get ticked. <BR/><BR/>It's okay, in my book, for the government to act in order to "promote the general welfare."<BR/>And there we are.spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154275050939459342006-07-30T11:57:00.000-04:002006-07-30T11:57:00.000-04:00I agree that we need to find alternative fuels for...I agree that we need to find alternative fuels for two reasons, I don't like smog and I don't like having to buy oil from the middle east and Hugo Chavez. <BR/><BR/>But I don't think there is anything to panic about. The climate might be changing, it certainly has before, but the notion that it is changing because of human activity is a stretch that can't be supported by any honest research that I have seen. <BR/><BR/>I can see why we needed NASA to go to the moon, there is no profit in that endeavor. But the person or company that can replace fossil fuels with an economically viable source will be able to buy and sell Bill Gates ten times over. <BR/><BR/>When oil was trading at ten dollars a barrel there was very little incentive to look for alternatives. That is not the case now. <BR/><BR/>What we don't need is a government arrangement with dinosaur companies that squeezes out the real inovators. Just keep the government out of the way and behold Yankee Ingenuity.Pile On®https://www.blogger.com/profile/13969212407780454348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154241252175956982006-07-30T02:34:00.000-04:002006-07-30T02:34:00.000-04:00I think more research should be done to make biodi...I think more research should be done to make <A HREF="http://geniusondanet.blogspot.com/2005/09/grease-is-word.html" REL="nofollow">biodiesel</A> a <I>viable</I> alternative energy source.<BR/><BR/>Nuclear powerplants for vehicles might <I><B>not</B></I> be such a good idea, though...camojackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07636605293846764764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154218047847036222006-07-29T20:07:00.000-04:002006-07-29T20:07:00.000-04:00I think one of us needs to read the Geek article y...I think one of us needs to read the Geek article you linked to again. What I read sounds like buying a hybrid is a win-win situation, except the cost of the tax credits to government (which is short-term I presume), and in my mind is more than offset by the 80% reduction in emissions between non-hybrid and hybrid cars. What am I missing?<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I didn't mean to get OT on discussion of hybrids. I mentioned the Toyota story because I thought it instructive of how "we" handled what may be viewed as a similar "challenge" when Clinton launched the <A HREF="http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/EOP/OVP/html/pngv2.html" REL="nofollow">PNVG</A> initiative in 1994 comparing it to the Apollo space program. <BR/><BR/>At the time, Alex Trotman, chairman and chief executive officer of Ford Motor Co., said, <EM>"The challenges faced by the partnership are great. But if anyone can do the job, it's American scientists, engineers, the national labs, and private industry -- working together." </EM><BR/><BR/>As long as Washington is in bed with Detroit, I fear the dance of the prototype will continue and it will remain too expensive, too impratical, too <EM>something</EM> for either to embrace seriously until WE demand it. This is a good start.portiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04787293661302431895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154209248511918822006-07-29T17:40:00.000-04:002006-07-29T17:40:00.000-04:00he fact remains, Portia, that the current crop of ...he fact remains, Portia, that the current crop of hybrids are not only inefficient from a dollars-to-doughnuts stand point <A HREF="http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/10871/doubts-cast-on-hybrid-efficiency.html" REL="nofollow">(insofar as their claimed efficiencies do not pay for themselves for years)</A> but that they are actually most expensive, energy wise, to produce and operated than a regular SUV. http://geekswithblogs.net/gaijin42/archive/2006/07/11/are_hybrids_really_green_true_cost_hybrid_TCO_utility_society_break_even.aspx<BR/><BR/>I want something sensible out of this mess. I want the United States to once again confound and inspire the world with the strength of this nation's historic ingenuity, pragmatism, and diversity. Why shouldn't tyrants cower when faced with such a potent resolve?<BR/>And why should we cower from exhibiting it? <BR/>We can wait, or we can lead. I want leadership.spd rdrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543431460609915876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13022824.post-1154206206011706712006-07-29T16:50:00.000-04:002006-07-29T16:50:00.000-04:00Bravo, spd. I am very glad you decided to put your...Bravo, spd. I am very glad you decided to put your idea, and the challenge, to paper. This is worthy of an op ed piece. Truly. You should <EM>shop</EM> this around.<BR/> <BR/>I realize you are talking about developing another form of energy to power our needs and that should be the challenge America accepts but there is so much we can do in the upcoming 10 years to conserve our use of conventional energy uses. Beginning with holding Detroit's feet to the fire. <BR/><BR/>It's 33 years since we first felt the shock of our dependence on foreign oil and what have we have done to wean ourselves off the black gold other than build bigger and heavier cars? <BR/><BR/>An article I read reently explained that one of the reasons Toyota developed the Prius was because it believed America was serious about its effort to improve fuel economy under Clinton's 1994 PNGV program (to have Detroit develop a car by 2004 that would get 80 mpg) so it redoubled its R&D efforts to compete! The Prius was unveiled in Detroit in 1997. How's that for accepting a challenge?<BR/><BR/>Of course, Clinton's PNGV program and its 2004 deadline for automakers to develop their prototype was gutted dring Bush's first year as President but that's a different post:)portiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04787293661302431895noreply@blogger.com