Alternative energy...
By andy77e
@andy77e (5156)
United States
August 25, 2011 12:06pm CST
Some people asked why some are against alternative energy. There's a number of reasons for this.
Of course the most important reason is... they don't work. *GASP*!
But I am open minded, if you have an example of a working useful economical alternative energy source, by all means tell me. I'll take the liberty to cover a few here.
Wind Power:
Fail. This is the biggest hoax ever foisted on the world at large. First there is no evidence of a net gain of power from a wind mill. This is a again, a hoax.
Think of all the power required to mine iron ore. Think of all the power to process that iron ore into steel. Think of all the power needed to fashion that steel into massive towers. Think of all the power needed to build the blades. Then the electric generators. And we're not even looking at the fuel used to transport the iron ore, the processed steel, the finished towers, or the cement foundation, or digging the holes.
Then running lines, and setting up power stations at the wind farms. Or worse out at sea.
Hundreds of millions of mega watts of power are being consumed, and billions of gallons of fuel burned, to make each and every single tower.
But once it's up, free power forever! Not exactly. Most people don't know that the average lifespan of a wind mill is only 10 to 15 years.
And finally, you still have to build a coal burning power plant to take over when the wind dies down. So you have to have a mega watt of installed conventional power for every mega watt of installed wind power.
Oh and about that 'installed capacity'. That's actually a fuzzy statement. Installed capacity with wind power is the total amount power produced at optimal wind speed. Problem is, if it goes too fast, the generator shuts off to prevent damage. If it goes to slow, the production drops off very quickly. A wind mill spinning at 50% of speed, doesn't produce 50% of power, but rather about 20% to 25%.
In order to pay for this expensive system that doesn't produce much power, the cost of conventional energy must rise to cover both the cost of the conventional power, and the cost of so-called 'renewable' power.
Thus in Germany where they have the most alternative energy, they also have some of the highest prices for energy. People are not regressing to using wood burning stoves in Germany to heat their homes.
Another popular alternative is Geothermal.
Geothermal is a horrible alternative fuel for a number of reasons. First, it can only be used in areas where there is abundant heat close to the surface. The deeper you must drill the less return on power, and the cost goes much much higher.
Further, Geothermal involves injecting water into hot rock deep in the Earth. Can you say 'Earthquake'? Well what did you expect from causing massive amounts of steam pressure deep in the crust of the Earth? Very bad idea.
Finally, the source of heat, the Earths core, moves heat up into the Earth through magma flows. The amount of heat in any given spot is limited. Geothermal sites routinely lose power over time. The amount of electricity produces continues to drop until an equilibrium is reached, where the mount of heat lost in steam is equal to the amount produced at that location.
Unfortunately, this means a huge investment, can in a matter of a few years, result in low power output. Which is why Geothermal power is horrifically expensive.
here's the problem
This is the problem in a nut shell. If alternative energies were in fact better than conventional sources, then they would be market competitive. But the fact is, they are not. Without huge subsidies from the government.
This is what people are against. I have no problem with alternative energy, until you make me pay in taxes, for something I'll have pay to get later. That doesn't make sense unless your a socialist democrat.
Remember the UK has tons of alternative fuels... yeah and their paying $15 a gallon.
So, here's your chance. Tell me what alternative energy you think is a plan?
7 responses
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
26 Aug 11
Andy, I go to the largest wing farm in north America every Friday. They are putting out enough energy to service 400,000 homes, and they aren't even have way through with this farm. I go to a dairy farm that creates electricity using gas from the cows. I personally have talked to people with AEP energy who say that personal wind turbine usage in rural areas could eliminate the need for electric companies in the next 30 years. When you see major corporations putting up solar fields to cut down their energy cost, you know it isn't a myth.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Aug 11
Nuclear power isn't consider an "alternative" energy source by the mainstream conventional wisdom.
The leftist idiocy groups are trying to end nuclear power.
I'm a full supporter of nuclear power. However, I don't see a need to end using oil or coal or natural gas.
But my main point in this thread is that the alternative energies currently being pushed by the uneducated left, all are horrible. If it wasn't so, I'd be in favor of it. But there is none that is good.
@BalthasarTheRat (656)
• United States
26 Aug 11
In Germany the fight you mention is complicated by the end of their nuclear production which means one less alternative and therefore no reason to subsidize a "cleaner" alternative. Their subsidies were designed to try to reduce their nuclear dependency and now that is no longer a problem as it was solved by direct legislation instead of economic incentive.
It's strange you didn't mention nuclear energy and noone has brought it up either. Do you consider nuclear energy a mainstream source that needs replaced or an alternative that just wasn't worth mentioning?
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
25 Aug 11
Oh, but don't forget solar power. Through the entire life of a solar panel, roughly 10 years, it will barely generate as much energy as is used in its creation. That doesn't even take into consideration the raw materials wasted to create this supposedly "free" energy source.
@valentinesdiner (1214)
• United States
26 Aug 11
I agree that this is the state of the art TODAY. With time, support and ingenuity, the future may be even (OK, bad pun) brighter tahn today.
Heck, we subsidize the oil companies with billions, maybe government subsidies to promote development of alternatives isn't so bad.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Aug 11
Does a subsidy for oil companies mean it's a good idea? No.
We shouldn't be giving a penny from the tax payers to ANY company.
And especially a company that doesn't provide a good product. Oil companies at least sell me a product I want.
AGAIN, just because I want gasoline doesn't mean I support subsidies... I'm saying wind and solar power, or any other alternative you can name, doesn't do ANYTHING for me. It's just a complete drain on my wallet through taxes and bills.
And further.... IF, and that's a big huge *IF* there, IF some company or inventor comes up with innovative new alternative fuel that really works, then it will not need subsidies to catch on, because it will be economical.
Your subsidies are only making the poor poorer, and the rich richer.
Let me tell you my personal experience with this. I worked at a company that produced parts for hybrid vehicles. I was in the meeting when the CEO was asked why a new hybrid power management system was not being developed.
His direct answer was this... we have decided to not design it until we can get a government grant to design it for free. That's almost verbatim.
So this multi-million dollar company was simply not going to make a product until they got tax payers to pay them to make it. And of course then we're going to charge them to buy it.
See we would have made that product either way. But because of people like you, we got the government to tax you to pay us to build our own product, and then charge you to buy it.
Pretty good deal for us. How about you? Rich richer, poor poorer. Thanks dude.
@valentinesdiner (1214)
• United States
26 Aug 11
The ALTERNTIVE to alternative fuels is to give up? Accept what we have until the fossil fuels are gone?
I would not give up and use the ingenuity and hope thaqt comes with solar and wind, etc. Who knows, maybe its not hopeless after all.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Aug 11
I am not suggesting that alternative fuels should not be investigated. I'm saying that we should tax the poor to fund the rich, in hopes of some magic fuel.
See, we've done things your way in Germany. The people have regressed to the point of wood burning stoves, because alternative energy is horrible expensive, and they still have to use oil and coal just like everyone else.
Wind and solar power can't replace conventional sources of power, no matter how much you invest into them.
We talk about how we hate the rich getting richer off the backs of the poor. Well wind and solar *IS* exactly that.
Think about it... I'm a rich guy (lets say). I build a wind mill. The government taxes you, and pays me to build the wind mill. Then I charge you for my power.
So you pay me, from both your taxes, and your electric bill.
Pretty good deal for me. How about you?
And this is happening throughout the economy.
Take Ethanol. Ethanol is horribly expensive. The government taxes you, to subsidize the cost of Ethanol. When you buy a gallon of Ethanol for $4, the cost is actually around $5 to $6, and government is taking money from you in taxes to pay that one or two dollars more, so you can buy it for $4.
Perhaps you would say you never bought a gallon of Ethanol? Not true. By federal mandate all gasoline has Ethanol in it, and that drives up the price.
So if I'm an Ethanol producer, I get money from the government, taxed from you, and then I am charging you for my product. Good deal for me, how about you?
I have no problem with you hoping in alternative fuels. Fine. But when you elect morons into government who tax you to pay for alternative fuels that don't work, ok... well... you are hoping stupidly. That very dumb.
@BalthasarTheRat (656)
• United States
26 Aug 11
The best plans are always self-sufficiency, but that's largely a dream. Living off the grid is best done without technology so the best alternate fuel source, as it has been forever, is manpower and animal power.
On a global technological scale it is not so much whether we should look for alternate energy sources but how long do we really have before we are forced to use alternatives. Better to try them out now and find the faults then go through this later as we are fighting over US$1000 barrels of oil.
In reality every problem you mention about those alternative fuel sources is true of oil and coal based energy as well, with the added problem of limited availability. Better to have problems with a dozen sources that don't run out than 2 that are going to destroy us to run out of.
Obviously we haven't found the perfect answer yet but denying funding to alternative fuel experiments is the surest way to NOT find one.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
27 Aug 11
Andy, we all know that you would rather wait, but the rest of us are smart enough to know that we can't just sit around and wait for someone else to do something.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
27 Aug 11
Andy, you need help that no one on here is qualified to give you. You really need to talk to some people with letters at the end of their names!!!
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Aug 11
And I have no problem if you want to live that way. Go join the Amish.
But the rest of us do not want what you are advocating.
I would rather wait. First, as the price of oil naturally goes up (assuming it will), then alternatives will naturally become viable without taxing the poor, to pay the rich.
Second, if we institute costly alternatives before we need to, it will only cost jobs, and benefit others without those costly stupid policies.
No, it takes far far less energy to produce a gallon of gas, than a gallon of gas produces, or coal. It's actually pretty stupid to suggest otherwise. You really want to claim that the amount of electricity produced by coal, is less than how much power is required to mine that coal?
If that were even remotely true, then one mine would consume all the power from a power plant, and no one else in the country would have electricity. Come on.... think! Stupid...
Obviously we haven't found the perfect answer yet but denying funding to alternative fuel experiments is the surest way to NOT find one.
Wrong. Even the bad alternatives we have now, were invented without government funding. Solar cells, wind mills, ethanol, biofuel... all existed before government started cramming taxes on us to pay for subsidies.
The problem is, they were not good alternatives then, and still are not today. We're just paying for rich people. This idiotic idea that without government giving money from the poor to the rich, that somehow no innovation will ever happen, is a retarded lie from the left.
@henkiprananda (2729)
• Indonesia
25 Aug 11
hi andy
yup, your right. in my country many people found alternative energy. but my government wasn't support for what we do. they more interest about money and money. yes alternative energy need much subsidies. but in fact, it can save much money. if it work
@henkiprananda (2729)
• Indonesia
26 Aug 11
it just first, but next, can you imagine if 20 years again we will loose all of oil in earth? maybe that just issue, but we can prepare for it. and if alternative energy is bad and need much money, what i see in my place is different. many people in my village can save their money to pay electricity, just using ordinary generator, and they use alternative energy. yup, it's bad. cause use "dung". hihihihiihi.....
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
26 Aug 11
If... *IF* we run out of oil, as oil supplies decrease, the cost will naturally go up. (supply vs demand)
As the price goes up, other options will naturally become more economical.
But to take money from the poor, to pay the rich, to produce something we don't need yet, is bad.
What does your generator running?
If your village can't get cheap power, then it makes sense there.
Here in America power is very cheap. The cost of alternative energy is 4 times more expensive.
@MrsHorton1120 (25)
• United States
27 Aug 11
I disagree with you wholeheartedly. My father has run his farm on solar and wind power for some time now. I don't think it is a complete solution for every home but I think that it is certainly an option for those who do not wish to be dependent on foreign oil or electric pricing.
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
27 Aug 11
You fathers farm doesn't use any oil? Really? So the plane that dusts the field runs on....? The combine...? The tractors? How about the trucks that deliver his produce? Or the trucks that provide the fertilizer? How about the fertilizer plant?
And solar? To power what exactly? Does he live in a tiny house? AC? Heat?
And who paid for his solar panels and wind mill? He didn't get a huge subsidy from the federal government, which we paid for through taxes?
@MrsHorton1120 (25)
• United States
27 Aug 11
I never said he didn't use ANY oil. However He paid every cent of everything on his property including solar. The government didn't give him anything. My father earned every bit. For your information there are no planes that dust caustic chemicals, no combine no tractors. No fertilizers of any kind unless you count his 200 chickens. He does not deliver produce, he is a CSA program. (Community Supported Agriculture) I guess you could count the oil in the vehicles of the families that pick up fresh ORGANIC vegetables if you felt the need. So no he does not use the Commercial Methods he is a FARMER not a uni-crop multi-billion dollar commercial enterprise. Yes his solar runs their A/C (In their 2 and a half story 4 bedroom) when they have company otherwise it isn't on and heat is the old fashioned kind: a woodstove. 2 Actually. Like I said I don't think it is a complete solution but it makes Dad far less dependent on foreign oil, electric pricing and our bankrupt government.
@MrsHorton1120 (25)
• United States
27 Aug 11
To add to that perhaps my first statement should have been I disagree with you that solar and wind power are a joke. To a degree they are helpful. I am all for drilling our own oil. Foreign oil makes me cringe, we are already so dependent on other countries. BP should have been raked over the coals and they weren't which is pathetic. However hating solar and wind power is not the answer. Every little bit counts toward the earth.
