Energy crisis resolved.

The facts back me up my friend. Turbines, were they not seen by the tree hugging, green peace brigade, as "ecologically" sound, would decry them for the same reason sane people do. They are a short term, knee jerk solution to a problem that will, ultimately, be solved by more scientific measures.
I'm done, and am mow off to solve the worlds energy crisis with wind energy..)

@oritteropo (oh ya, as an aside, if your a fan of Wigner, his pupal Alvin Weinberg was already thinking about the energy crisis back in the 50/60's, and wrote a great little diddy on it "ENERGY as an ultimate raw material, or problems of burning the sea and burning the rocks" http://energyfromthorium.com/energy-weinberg-1959/ They cut them from a different mold back then I guess.)

>> ^VoodooV:

It's less dirty coal, but it's still dirty, yet they get to call it CLEAN for some reason.
cold fusion, solar, hydrogen fuel cells or GTFO


Name 3 things that won't work in time for it to matter!

Go gen4 reactors, lots of them, and now! I recommend David MacKay's book "Sustainable Energy - without the hot air" as to why I believe this. Available for free at http://www.withouthotair.com/

Video reference here:

http://videosift.com/video/TEDxWarwick-Physics-Constrain-Sustainable-Energy-Options


But ya, coal needs to go, but you have to remember, 2 billion people live in abject poverty. They try to bridge the gap using as cheap a source of energy they can...like coal. Until you make energy cheaper than coal, your never going to displace the use of dino fuels around the world. The physics on fusion, solar, and hydrogen can't answer that call for quite awhile (we have been trying to make fusion work for decades, same with solar, and fuel cells are just terrible right now and only work for transportation fuels not baseload power generation). I do think we can answer a large number of these problems with new generations of nuclear power, with passive safety and no emissions, gen4 reactors have a lot of great points if people give them a chance!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/

In relation to the direct content of the video, your NEVER going to get China and India on board with giving up cheap energy...they are BOTH x3 the population of the US, they have to care about cheap energy WAAAAY more than us, for population and standard of living issues. The only way to win this isn't through regulation, it is through technological innovation...and China has been buying up our AP1000 Gen3 for all the reasons I just mentioned.

To say that dino fuels are "Destroying us" is a little bit of a misnomer, you don't get food without hydrocarbons, you don't have refrigeration without hydrocarbons, you don't get heating and cooling without hydrocarbons. Energy isn't the enemy, any attempts to price out energy will only hurt the most reliant on its low price...if you doubled the price of gas via taxation, you aren't helping the little man. Cheap energy prices, even if they are oil based, aren't the devil, any attempts to make them so is a misunderstanding of the energy crisis. More oil drilling isn't even going to lower costs, at best, it will keep them the same, but peak oil in the US has already come, more drilling in more exotic places is just going to tow the line...and it isn't even going to do that.

Talking about clean coal is just so "we" can talk about how much we need cheap energy without talking about the health effects. Coal does kill, without a doubt, but so does electricity so costly you can't afford heating or cooling. You can't call for an elimination of coal without talking about what is going to replace it, and at what cost. This is even MORE relevant with the recent spout of weather, imagine if that area was packed full of solar and wind...it most likely be completely destroyed, and those are already very cost heavy forms of energy.

Anyway, I will end the rant. I really recommend the book above if you wish to delve down the rabbit hole of energy solutions. It isn't as easy as you think, it is why we are still using dino fuels. Any path you choose is challenging, and VERY capital and R&D intensive. Were are talking multiple trillion dollars to role out replacements on a national scale. Now, oil does a trillion a year, so this isn't outside the realm of possibility, but it is going to take a technical answer to solve, not a political one.

I should point out we actually do use the weak force for energy production, that is what is going on in the curiosity rover, radioactive decay of Pu238...but it is one of the lowest power conversion ratios that you can do for electricity production (thermocouple). They are just really simple with no moving parts, but it ain't going to solve no energy crisis! We actually have infinite gravity wells via black holes, @maestro156, but you still can't generate perpetual motion from it. I would like to hear your idea on how you could, though.

No doubt ADSR would produce some great science, but it wouldn't address chemistry issues, or any other important issue any better than a LFTR project. It seems to me that it just introduces large amounts of extra complexity and cost. Particle accelerators are big unreliable machines, hence the need for 3 of them for redundancy and they could well reduce safety if something goes wrong. They are not even particularly suited to breeding, as they produce protons which as the name suggests are charged and so need to be very high energy to hit a nucleus and cause fission. The cynic in me says the whole idea was cooked up by the nuclear energy industry to ensure costs could be kept high, and so turn them and their friends in other energy industries a bigger profit (or even just a profit?). My understanding is also that between the various stockpiles of fissile we have, and high breeding ratios from early LFTRs startup fuel should not be a big issue.

I wish you all the best in your learning, I can think of few endeavors more worthy of changing your life's direction >> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^Spacedog79:
The ADSR or "Accelerator Driven Sub-critical Reactor" is unfortunately a massive waste of time. Why not build a properly configured LFTR reactor and it does just the same thing and you don't need to build 3 large particle accelerators to do it.

I agree in one sense, but in another, the chemistry of the LFTR might prove impossible to solve (though this is hardly even a fear atm), so divesting in a "less" effective way to fission isn't a complete waste. Also, you could use this just to breed thorium which would be handy if you hand thousands of thorium generators to start up (you need a good deal of U233 to start the reaction as Thorium is only fertile, not fissionable). This also would be a good way to burn up waste before we get a highly functional LFTR's with the ability to siphon in fission products. In the end, no road should be left uncharted when the end result maybe the salvation of the energy crisis and a life like star trek
I play to dedicate most of my laymen efforts over the next couple of months in learning more about fission for use in determining if I want to drop my life for what is it now and pursue nuclear physics. Pretty sharp turn from where I am now, but I almost feel morally compelled to do so.

>> ^Spacedog79:

The ADSR or "Accelerator Driven Sub-critical Reactor" is unfortunately a massive waste of time. Why not build a properly configured LFTR reactor and it does just the same thing and you don't need to build 3 large particle accelerators to do it.


I agree in one sense, but in another, the chemistry of the LFTR might prove impossible to solve (though this is hardly even a fear atm), so divesting in a "less" effective way to fission isn't a complete waste. Also, you could use this just to breed thorium which would be handy if you had thousands of thorium generators to start up (you need a good deal of U233 to start the reaction as Thorium is only fertile, not fissionable). This also would be a good way to burn up waste before we get a highly functional LFTR's with the ability to siphon in fission products. In the end, no road should be left uncharted when the end result maybe the salvation of the energy crisis and a life like star trek

I plan to dedicate most of my laymen efforts over the next couple of months in learning more about fission for use in determining if I want to drop my life for what is it now and pursue nuclear physics. Pretty sharp turn from where I am now, but I almost feel morally compelled to do so.

>> ^quantumushroom:

A perfect example of why this man cannot be President. Does he really think of the Iranian government (militant nutball-run theocracy) as merely the shortest kid on the softball team, intimidated because everyone else is taller? The kookiness is mixed in with the common sensical good things he says like rat droppings in rice.


TBH, as long as they just nuke their neighbors, who cares! We could sell the glass and solve the energy crisis.

I wouldn't like to be so specific as to ask about cold fusion or lightning or even how do we solve the energy crisis, or how do we cure cancer (though these are all good questions and I would be hard pressed to come up with anything better in the spur of the moment).

It would seem to me that given the power of such a miraculous hypothetical situation, the key to getting the most out of it would be to strike deeper than the obvious and immediate problems. The kid had the spirit with the light question (impressively so). The answer to that question would fill volumes, and a complete answer would very likely supersede what we already know.

On further reflection, I think really deep physics questions would be the way to go...

What is the nature of gravity (in full)?

What is wrong with the general theory of relativity?

How is our current Standard Model of particle physics wrong?

Even if we didn't understand the answers, it would be immensely helpful to have some extra meat to chew on.

Of course, I'm just biased...some spiritual question might be worthy too. I'm just inclined to believe that there are no real answers there.

>> ^Throbbin:

@NetRunner - it's almost like Americans are proud of being ignorant. Remember this?

Sure do. And yes, it is almost like Americans are proud of being ignorant.

It's not really pride in ignorance, so much as a segment of the population that believes "common sense" and "hard work" make you as smart or smarter than anyone who's well-educated and does white collar work (book smarts). They feel that all that learnin' just gets in the way of seeing the simple and obvious truth (i.e. what they "know" is true in their gut).

So they feel perfectly justified in saying things like "inflating your tires can't possibly help with our energy crisis" or "global warming isn't real because it snowed in winter", and feel like there's no possible retort to that, because your responses will involve some sort of book-learning term like "data" or "scientific method" or "falsifiable hypothesis".

It should surprise no one that this particular meme is especially strong within the right-wing world of politics, and the rural areas of America...

All I gotta say is, we're a big, diverse country, and we aren't all like that.

omg. I've solved the energy crisis.

If we make the slide out of plastic we can collect the static charge on each of the kittens at the bottom and put the food at the top so they walk/get carried back up.

The fact remains that Obama apparently did promise to keep the negotiations public, and he did apparently make that statement about C-Span. He did promise more openness and transparency, and if he hasn't made any effort towards fulfilling those promises then I've a hard time understanding what your point of contention is with this clip.

The only thing Cafferty said here, and the only point he wanted to make, is that Obama promised openness and transparency that he hasn't delivered on. Bringing up a 2003 energy crisis is besides the point, as it doesn't add to the discussion but instead introduces another, unrelated, point to the original one.
If airing the healthcare negotiations was such a bad idea that Obama couldn't bear to go through with it then Cafferty's point is just made stronger, as the campaign promise was made and made again over several appearances, speeches and functions.

How short is the typical GOP's memory? the 2003 energy crisis was held by the largest energy companies. At the White House, in closed doors, off the record. They did allow republican congressmen in to the dealings, but not democratic.

To bad Mr. Cafferty doesn't bring that nugget of history up. Would keep the republicans from crying foul.

Knowing history, If the Democrats DID air the debate between the bills, I think we would have the following:

A) The lobbyists would be jocking for position. Using money to 'motivate' a senator to 'vote' how they want. You and I both know, they'd do it in a heart beat. They would also tell their republican senator minions (that's right, minions) of the details.

B) Those who are in the GOP, but not a senator, would just be in a mindless rage. They would walk on the mall, in the freezing cold. Hundreds would die of the cold, because their mind's can only think on so many things at once. And of course, the GOP would blame those deaths on the Democrates some how. You and I both know, they'd do it.

C) We'd get to see what its like to have educated people argue over something, based on the merits, not passionate stupidity, as we saw in town hall meetings across the nation this summer.

I had a serious illness a few years ago. The medical bill, if not insured (I did my homework out of intellectual curiousity), was $387,630. I'd like to see anyone not in the upper 8% of this nation's wealth afford this, WITHOUT going bankrupt. Yes, you STILL have to may the morgage on the house, and all the other expenses like cloths, food, gas, etc. Oh, and do this, when you dont have a job, because you were laid off, during a bad economy.

There's no way to do it. None.

Fortunately, I have and had, Mass Health (for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts), that paid for it. Yeah, I suffered on a level you will never know, nor understand, during that time period. You want to know what torture feels like? experience a year of what I went through. Anyone that has heard the tale and knows me, just is amazed at the horror ahd Hell I went through to get better (mostly).

I've come to understand the two sides of this: Republican and Democrat.

Republican: Do not want this, as its feared it will interfere with PROFIT. That's right, reduce the human equation down to numbers related to a substance that doesnt exist in the nature world: money. But then, I can not recall the last time I saw, heard, or witness a republican showing compassion for their fellow Americans, UNLESS, they themselves were also gaining from the act of compassion.

Democrats: Traditionally been the group that helps the workers out. Help pass structures and legal code that brought the worlding hours down in states from 60 to 40 hours a week. Put in a number of healthy life style provisions over the years. And now, they are doing something that benefits Americans for decades to come.

You can argue my words anyway you want. Republicans LIE to get what they want. They lied to get Bush in to office back in 2000. They lied on the energy crisis of 2003. They lied on Iraqq (no nuclear WMD, anyone?). They lied on Afghanistan. Some say they lied on 9/11. They lied on 'no nation building'. They lied for months on Health Care Reform. This video here, is simply showing, how often, and deeply, the lies go. We even have Winston above, showing us bold face lies.

You know Winston....

If you show up at the ER one night in catostophic pain, from an unknown source (be it a kidney stone, heart attack, etc). And the person there said "ok, you can access our hospital, but first, you must: A) Give us all your money B) Make yourself our slave, C) Give your body parts away for free. You WILL do so. Because, when someone is in that level of pain and suffering, they can not think straight, clearly, or consciously. Its a level of torture, someone like you, is unfamilar with. And yes, fortunately, the US hospitals (thanks to good legistation) prevent this sort of thing taking place. However, this sort of thing takes place outside of ER's every day in the US. You just choose not to see, hear, or witness it,

because....YOU....ARE....NOT....COMPASSIONATE....TO...YOUR....FELLOW....AMERICANS!

>> ^CaptainPlanet:
if we covered texas in these, could we solve the energy crisis?


I'm reasonably certain that solar panels would be massively more efficient, albeit not nearly as fun to watch.