Fossil Fuels v's Alternative Energy

Wind turbines on every house to provide power at a ‘local level’.

Large wind farms and wave power generators to provide the bulk of the energy needs in this country, whilst some coal fired power stations with the latest emmissions cleaning equipment can provide extra capacity when required (or when the wind drops!).

I’m not a great fan of bio-diesel as we should be using the land to grow crops to eat, rather than to power cars…

Regards,

Dan

Compromise is the only solution that holds any hope of success , we cant expect the world to change overnight.but we must address the problems that mans actions and needs are causing.

In both the Uk and Ireland it is only recently that Government has addressed these issues..our homes are not efficient , our heating systems the same.On an individual level we should look to those who have to live in more extreme climates.the Scandinavians and those living in the Alps didnt have Oil years ago…Wood pellet/grain burners seem to be one solution that has been available for years both in Europe and the states and only arriving here now..

Wind /wave power is after all freely available..in practice we prob would have to continue to use some fossil fuels for some time untill we educate ourselves to the new ways…

With regards to using bio fuels overe here we recently closed the last major sugar production facility in the country..effected farmers are now being encouraged to switch to the production of “bio” crops .We have after all a surplus in the production of many agricultural products so why not use the land for more efficient or needed crops?

Not as simple as that, wind power capacity is in effect excess capacity as you still need a reliable base capacity to cover for wind powers unreliability, and coal fired stations can not just be switched on and off according to wind conditions. From a financial and security of supply perspective wind seems the worst of all the options.

Wind turbines on every house to provide power at a ‘local level’.

Large wind farms and wave power generators to provide the bulk of the energy needs in this country, whilst some coal fired power stations with the latest emmissions cleaning equipment can provide extra capacity when required (or when the wind drops!).

I’m not a great fan of bio-diesel as we should be using the land to grow crops to eat, rather than to power cars…

Regards,

Dan

I would like too put a slightly different slant on all this . There does seem too be rhyme and reason in our development as an intelligent Species. Idea’s in our mind’s are transformed into physical manisfestations. Surely if oil happen’s too be available and our mind devises method’s of Transport which use this basic material, there can’t be much wrong with that. Yes , we are using and abusing this Planet, but I don’t see much wrong in that. Obviously we can go too far,and that’s when the warning signs appear. Our development and survival is only guaranteed by our actions, we are being put too the test. So until we have the improved Technology( wake up out there) we are going too have a hard time . Until our leaders realise, that putting money into technological progress, is more important than raking in Taxes off of Fuel , we won’t progress. 🙂
________________________________________

djcross beat me to the draw there.

He’s right, you know. 🙂

Wind is one of the least suitable ways to generate power at industrial level (ie. to feed the grid), it’s expensive, unreliable and you still need a base load generation capability anyway. Most of the power industry wants new generation nuclear stations.

I love it when greenies twitter about fuel cells because they don’t understand the technical aspects.

The most commonly available fuel cells run on H2 and O2 to produce electricity, waste steam (H2O) and a small amount of unused H2. H2/O2 fuel cells are about 75% efficient (25% loss mainly as heat).

Let’s discuss where the fuel for that fuel cell comes from…H2 is produced in bulk by thermal cracking of natural gas. This means the evil fossil fuel companies still have to drill, collect and transport natural gas (while spoiling the pristine environment :diablo: ). The cracking tower uses electricity to generate the heat needed to strip H2 atoms off of natural gas molecules. That electricity has to be generated and transmitted over a respectable distance with typically 35% efficiency (65% loss – this also applies to hydro-electric, windmills, geothermal and other methods of electrical power generation and transmission).

H2 has extremely low density (it’s the stuff that kept the Hindenburg aloft) and to reduce its bulk to a manageable size requires compression (~135 atmospheres) or liquification (-252C). Even with reduced bulk the high pressure or cryogenic storage tanks are huge –tanks the sizes of a city bus for a 4 passenger family sedan with 300km range between fill-ups. O2 also needs to have its bulk reduced in similar fashion. All that fuel/oxidizer compression is done through electric pumps with 40% efficiency (60% loss).

As you can surmise by multiplying the various efficiencies, fuel cells are NOT energy efficient or environmentally friendly due to amount of electricity that has to be generated and transmitted to obtain usable H2 and O2. And I haven’t touched on the energy needed to build the fuel cell and its components!

Hydro electric needs Dams too drive turbines, that would mean laying waste too large areas of countryside by intentional Flooding.

Hydrogen power cells at this time are not cost effective,and must be developed in such a way as too make them safe for Mobile use. probably possible in the future.

Photo Voltaic cells could be used on roofs of Houses, however I am concerned about Strong Wind damage too this structure. A Hurricane force Wind may get under the gap between the Roof and Cells and remove either the cells or roof.

Dont forget wind turbines which are a good idea, you could have one installed at home. I believe the Government likes this idea. 🙂
________________________________________