A plan to end oil addiction

[ncorrenti 0]

I'm really enjoying this conversation by the way

[Ocean11 0]

It's completely irrelevant whether nuclear power is 'safe' or not. The risks and costs are far, far greater than for existing renewable and conservation technologies. There isn't any need to go to that risk and expense.

[Ocean11 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by nicole:
Ok, so the world's largest wind power plant (Texas, USA) only powers 7000 homes. We are going to need a crapload of wind power plants to have enough power for everyone - where are you going to stick them all?

I may be wrong about this, but I think that farm may be quite old and not as powerful as it could be. Those are also American homes - some of the energy practices of other Americans surprise even normal Americans.

As for where to stick all the windmills - all over. People generally seem to like them when they're up. They can be made to fit the location - they don't all have to be vast. And if all the water and solar power was tapped too, you wouldn't actually need to have windmills all over anyway.

Big windfarms shouldn't be powering homes - homes should be powering themselves. Windfarms should be powering industry.

[bushpig 0]

It might not be considered a major accident Nicole, but if my memory serves me correctly, then in amongst the number of nuclear facility accidents that have happened in Japan since I have been here, there was one about 2 or 3 years back where a guy who was exposed died. I can't remember if a second woker did too, or just got very sick. It happens, but maybe it doesn't make the news worldwide unless it is a large scale accident with many deaths at once.

[ncorrenti 0]

You can't just stick them in suburbia you know. They've gotta be out in the middle of nowhere because no one wants to live near them. Surveys have shown that in theory, most people support wind farms, but when it comes to having one in their backyard, they don't like them so much.

 

Check it: http://abc.net.au/news/items/200601/1557999.htm?illawarra

[ncorrenti 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by Bushpig:
It might not be considered a major accident Nicole, but if my memory serves me correctly, then in amongst the number of nuclear facility accidents that have happened in Japan since I have been here, there was one about 2 or 3 years back where a guy who was exposed died. I can't remember if a second woker did too, or just got very sick. It happens, but maybe it doesn't make the news worldwide unless it is a large scale accident with many deaths at once.

That's sad. You're right though - unless there's a huge catastrophe, we don't hear about the deaths that occur every day.

I have a friend who worked on an oil rig and was involved in an explosion that killed five guys. He was lucky (?) to escape with a broken back. It didn't make headlines.
And just the other day in China 12 workers were killed in a gas explosion in a mine shaft. It wasn't very widely reported either.

[Curt 1]

I'm going to start really reading up on this subject, I am finding it increasingly interesting - unfortunately don't know enough to be able to add much right now Educate!

[Ocean11 0]

nicole, that link isn't to a survey that shows what you're suggesting is fact. It's to some individual who doesn't want a wind farm.

 

There are of course lots of such people, and they're right to do all they can to protest if they don't like it. But there are other people who like windmills, and welcome them, and the tourist income they often generate. People who are hostile at first also come around (I guess some don't either).

 

The difference between a windfarm and nuclear power station is that you can take most of the windfarm down later and reuse the parts within a few years. But with nuclear, you're left with a pile of stuff that you can't go near for 250,000 years. The lady who doesn't like the windfarm probably wouldn't like a nuclear power station any better.

 

(Disclosure: I'm invested in a windfarm that is contested . I would have invested in turbines in Japan if they had offered better returns and smaller investments. I'd also be happy to live near a turbine that provided power for my local economy.

[js 0]

‘Can you substantiate this claim? There have only been two major nuclear power generation accidents in history, those being Three Mile Island (no fatalities) and Chernobyl, which killed 31 people directly and an estimated 2500 people indirectly.’

 

That estimated indirect death figure is VERY suspect considering most of the people who were evacuated (> 200,000) were more-or-less irradiated to some extent before leaving – the long term figure will climb in the next ten years undoubtedly.

 

Three Mile Island is shrouded in cover-ups. If you dig deep enough you’ll see the long term effects.

 

For the overall affects of, for example, the Chernobyl disaster, see the following.

 

Unofficial Effects (very interesting):

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chernobyl-revisited/

 

Semi Official Effects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_accident#Longer-term_effects

 

Official Effects:

Depends who you talk to – most technical studies have vested interests, so put the two above together and make up your own mind … there’s lots of stuff out there that raises a big question-mark above the whole industry.

 

Two countries were heavily affected – Ukraine and Belarus. Both were agricultural communities … the so-called breadbasket of the USSR. Now their produce is worthless, unless of course you wanna consume irradiated food!

 

 

‘Now, I would imagine that there have been a lot more fatalities and accidents from exploding transformers and coal mine and oil rig accidents than from nuclear power disasters. I hear about them all the time. Not to mention that in the US alone, more than 23,000 deaths each year can be attributed to air pollution from power plants.’

 

Like I said – short term versus long term, plus storage of waste, etc. (Interestingly, when radioactive waste deteriorates, it changes from one isotope to another – some stages of decay produce more volatile substances than other stages. So it is not as clear-cut as some people would have us believe.)

 

Here’s some interesting little maps of reactors in the US, UK & Japan – lots eh? Scary! (What about repatriation of the land they're on when they close?)

 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/map-power-reactors.html

http://www.insc.anl.gov/pwrmaps/map/united_kingdom.php

http://www.cscap.nuctrans.org/Nuc_Trans/locations/japan/japan.htm

 

 

As for in someone elses backyard, well, the Chernobyl disaster should dispel that myth.

 

Basically, if somebody believes that the nuclear industry is safe, then they also support President Bush, believe in everything his cronies espouse, and will be looking forward to seeing the Easter Bunny in the near future.

[Yuki's Passion 1]

(A bit off topic though its money related)

 

Id like to see all of America's HNWIs (high net worth individuals - financial asset wealth of over a million dollars US) and ultra-HNWIs (worth over 30 million US) have a tax increase.

 

America has 2.5 million people who have over a million dollars out of 250 million people. There are 29,000 people who have over 30 million dollars. WTF arent their taxes raised by at least 1%?!? Instead of giving those rich F'kers tax breaks they should be paying more

 

The rift between the rich and poor is getting bigger and the Neo Cons are at fault for that IMO.

 

The extra money earned from taxes could be used for alternative energy sources that many of you have talked about, help pay back our outrageous national debt, and be used for education too... and whatever else you could think of...

 

Its sad the way our country is being run

[Ocean11 0]

 

Ikata just down the coast from me shuts down nearly every month with some leak of something or a maintenance SNAFU. Each time they say "There is no effect on the outside environment". That is more risk than I really want.

 

That part of the peninsular is expected to be hit by a 2.5 to 3 m tsunami in the likely event of a big earthquake (the Nankai). The windmills located on the same peninsular won't be affected, but even if they were, the harm would be minimal. The same cannot be said for the nuclear reactors.

[ncorrenti 0]

011: That's cool (re your wind farm)!

Out of curiosity, have you been to the site?

 

SubZero: I'm not suggesting that nuclear energy is completely safe. It's not. I do believe safety measures are more stringent in nuclear power plants though, than say, a coal fire power plant. It's kinda like comparing planes with cars. Planes get serviced and safety tested more frequently than cars because if a plane crashes it's going to kill a lot more people than a single car crash.

 

P.S. Are you telling me there ISN'T an Easter Bunny?!

[js 0]

I remember a quote from the late Kerry Packer in this country (paraphrased):

 

'Like all Australians, I pay as much tax as the law requires of me, if they want me to pay more, then change the tax rules. Morals don’t, and can’t, come into such discussions of legislation and taxation.'

 

Fair comment – in the end, all our woes are the fault of crappy Government decision. That perhaps can be extended to include the apathy, and to some extent greed, of the ‘Y-Generation’!

[js 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by nicole:
011: That's cool (re your wind farm)!
Out of curiosity, have you been to the site?

SubZero: I'm not suggesting that nuclear energy is completely safe. It's not. I do believe safety measures are more stringent in nuclear power plants though, than say, a coal fire power plant. It's kinda like comparing planes with cars. Planes get serviced and safety tested more frequently than cars because if a plane crashes it's going to kill a lot more people than a single car crash.

P.S. Are you telling me there ISN'T an Easter Bunny?!

Well, I've been on tours of both types of plants. Rules are stringent at both, but by virtue of what nuclear ones use, their waste products, and the ability for things to go wrong at a number of levels, they are far less safe.

There's no Bunny Babe - but there is a Bilby!

[darkfootwarrior 0]

I wanted to get a Cadillac diesel engine put into my 77 DeVille, but not sure if that really makes sense unless i'm going to go the extra mile for hydraulics and pleather...

 

leading me to ask if anyone has suggestions for the best autos to convert to bio-dies?

[bushpig 0]

An accident in a nuclear facility here was caused by a worker mixing the materials in a metal bucket!! The metal sparked the nuclear reaction! (sorry for my lack of technical savvy here, but that was essentially what happened) What an idiot! You'd think they had stringent guidelines about this wouldn't you Nicole?

[ncorrenti 0]

That made me laugh, even though it's not really funny!

 

Well I guess that puts a serious dent in my theory!

[bushpig 0]

yeah, it is so ridiculous it is laughable isn't it!

[darkfootwarrior 0]

Lawrence Lindsey, former economic advisor to Bush, estimated the cost of a war in Iraq could reach $200 billion. This was of course before the war when the admin. was trying to get congressional support for war, and they fired the guy because of this seemingly exorbitant cost of a simple little conflict... ha - ha - ha. Lindsey is also quoted as saying, "the best way to keep oil prices in check is a short, successful war on Iraq." i firmly believe this was the reason the u.s. illegaly invaded iraq.

 

anyway, my point is that wind and solar installations are expensive, but certainly a better investment considering. i believe 3 states : kansas, oklahoma, and texas could supply significant wind-generated energy supplies to a vast number of u.s. households via a national energy grid that was set up back in the late 30s.... but i'm trying to remember facts from a conference i went to two years ago, so i could be wrong... sorry this is so long.

[Ocean11 0]

> leading me to ask if anyone has suggestions for the best autos to convert to bio-dies?

 

Not quite sure if you know what you're asking there, but you don't need to convert a diesel vehicle to use biodiesel - just fill it with biodiesel (which I believe is available in some places in Hokkers) and make sure you change the oil filter a short while after the change. PM me if you want some more info.

[darkfootwarrior 0]

ocean11-

 

sorry, can't PM you - too deliquent in my habits

 

but, i'm pretty sure you have to manually convert a diesel engine in order for it to burn bio-diesel fuel. i have a friend with an old mercedes (forgot which class) which he converted and seems to like, and i know Jetta diesels are popular, but just wanted other opinions...

[Ocean11 0]

If the diesel is an old one, you may have to change the rubber tubing to something tougher, but newer diesels already have good tubes. Any questions you have would probably be answered at http://forums.biodieselnow.com/default.asp

 

I doubt you'll find (m)any Mercedes or VW diesels in Japan, but there are plenty of Japanese diesels.

[darkfootwarrior 0]

cool. thanks. actually not going to proceed until i get back home after a couple years... but always been fascinated.

[damian 0]

Curt - I am a beginner in this area and understand your interest in wanting to know more. There are many aspects to read up on, so these suggestions are only a drop in the ocean. The following two books and both gave me some feel for the realities of powering a home with sun and/or wind. The solar power book is a little frustrating to read, but written by quite an individual with his own personality. There is loads of great info but is harder to quickly digest because the writer tried to make it easy to digest. The wind book is quite technical and simply gets to the topic of what kind of wind systems are available to power certain types of needs. Unlike the solar book, the wind book is more technical and doesn't bother to explain how it all works from the ground up. Even though the solar book is dumbed down, it gives a nice intro into electricity fundamentals and the realities of powering a home using solar generated DC current. It is a perfectly great idea and very doable, but not as straight forward as the lay person first suspects.

 

Solar

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0967189...5Fencoding=UTF8

 

Wind

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1890132...5Fencoding=UTF8

[Oyuki kigan 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by Ocean11:
It's completely irrelevant whether nuclear power is 'safe' or not. The risks and costs are far, far greater than for existing renewable and conservation technologies. There isn't any need to go to that risk and expense.

Not according to James Lovelock. He recently argued that it is probably the only energy system we have in place capable of providing enough power to stop CO2 pollution in a timely manner.

Agreed, it is a dangerous gamble. Nuclear power sucks. But we are already screwed. Until people wake up and change their consumption habits drastically, what to do?