RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Poll: Energy source preferences.(22 posts)

Poll: Energy source preferences.czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 9:49 AM
What would you rather have in your "backyard"? Please rank the following (e.g. D, C, B, A)

A) A nuclear reacting power plant.
B) A fossil fuel burning power plant.
C) A wind farm.
D) A solar farm.
re: Poll: Energy source preferences.Alpedhuez55
Aug 22, 2003 10:08 AM
well, if by "backyard" you mean in my town or region I would say:

1. Wind
2. Solar
3. Nuclear
4. Fossil
C, D, A, B (NM)Tri_Rich
Aug 22, 2003 10:13 AM
cdba nmbboc
Aug 22, 2003 10:35 AM
D,C,A,B, but what we'd really like ...RoyGBiv
Aug 22, 2003 11:01 AM
is a hydrogen fuel cell in every basement
Aren't fuel cells are like batteries. . .czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 11:06 AM
. . . in that they are a means to store engergy that is generated by other, typically polluting means? I may be wrong, but I beleive that you'd still need a primary source to charge the cells.
Aren't fuel cells are like batteries. . .PdxMark
Aug 22, 2003 11:12 AM
Fuel cells actually generate electricity by a chemical reaction that, in it's purist form, releases just water. They are somewhat "like" batteries in that they operate by chemical reaction (ignoring that burning fuel is a chemical reaction), but they actually need a source of fuel (hydrogen - or a chemical with available hydrogen) to run through the reaction.
Thanks. (nm)czardonic
Aug 22, 2003 11:27 AM
yes, they use hydrogen and oxygen and produce h2o. But...dr hoo
Aug 23, 2003 3:18 AM
The H must be gathered, usually by splitting water. The production of H uses more energy than is released. So in practice, they are like a battery.

The advantage comes in transporting the energy. Solar has made many improvements, but you still need lots of sun, like in a desert. Wind takes steady wind. By producing H, that localized clean power can easily be made mobile.

Also, using power sources at larger scale pollutes less than many small power plants. An H generator that supplied 400k cars will pollute a lot less than 400k cars burning gas.
yes, it's exactly like a batteryDougSloan
Aug 25, 2003 6:34 AM
Unless someone finds some pure and compressed hydrogen source, making hydrogen and storing it is pretty much the same concept as a battery. Isn't the power/weight ratio much better, though?

Doug
CDB, and further develop microenergy sources...PdxMark
Aug 22, 2003 11:08 AM
Microenergy is the notion of localized/distributed small energy sources. One example is a high-rise building fuel cell (the size of a truck) running off natural gas plumbed to the site. Whether fuel cells, or roof-top wind/solar generators (as appropriate), we can incrementally increase power generation where it is used. There would be complications with integration to the grid, but there are millions of locations where these types of energy sources could be placed with minimal impact on the environment.
If the world were sensible I'd take the nuclear butContinental
Aug 22, 2003 11:16 AM
So many people have an irrational fear of nuclear that the value of my house would plummet most with nuclear. So I wouldn't want one in literally in my back yard, but the power plant could be in a sparsely populated place miles away. In this case I take nuclear, hands down.

If you choose solar or wind, do you also choose to cut you power consumption to 30% of what it is now and pay 3 times more. I don't know if those numbers are right, but electricity would be much more expensive and less available.

I guess that leaves fossil fuels if I really had to have a plant in my backyard. Does a Honda Generator fueled by natural gas count? no problem then.
Agree about nuclearRoyGBiv
Aug 22, 2003 11:34 AM
There's too much paranoia about nuclear plants.
Aren't wind farms noisy? They're certainly an eyesore.
C D A BFr Ted Crilly
Aug 22, 2003 1:11 PM
DCAB...but what about conservation?cory
Aug 22, 2003 3:32 PM
I'm iffy on the wind farm--I've been close to those suckers, and they make a lot of noise. But if my back yard can be far enough away that I don't have to hear the windmills, I'll take 'em.
My FIRST choice, though, would be a smart, minimal-pain conservation drive. At least in my SUV/hot tub/two-computer/dramatic outdoor lighting neighborhood, people could easily cut their power use 10-20 percent. Then maybe I wouldn't need ANYTHING in the back yard for awhile.
What about Dilithium Crystals?firstrax
Aug 22, 2003 8:17 PM
millions of hampsters spinning in tiny wheels (nm)empacher6seat
Aug 22, 2003 10:28 PM
or just toss Lance on a stationary bike, like in the ESPN commercial.
re: Poll: Energy source preferences.Me Dot Org
Aug 23, 2003 4:48 AM
I guess wind is the preferred source, except I hate riding into it...
I'm very surprised.Spoke Wrench
Aug 23, 2003 2:48 PM
I'm surprised that so many people chose wind power over solar. A couple of posters indicated wind farms make a lot of noise. I'm also aware that wind farms create havoc with birds. What are the negative issues regarding solar power?
all cycling races to now be virtual reality.rufus
Aug 23, 2003 9:02 AM
instead of actually riding on the roads, all riders are on computerized training machines hooked up to power generators. the course is displayed by computerized graphics, the pedalling resistance changes as the course does, and electricity is produced.
Green Power!critmass
Aug 25, 2003 1:09 AM
Renewalble energies like Bioenergy, Geothermal, Hydrogen. Hydropower, Ocean, Solar or Wind. The UK has wind power creating just a little more noise than normal background wind noise. Europe is far ahead of the U.S. on this especially in using wave and tidal energy and ocean thermal energy conversion. But then we do like our fossil fuels and all the juice we get from
seeing our military kick ass to get it.
d, c, a, bDougSloan
Aug 25, 2003 6:31 AM
Why the heck can't we build more nuclear plants along the ocean? We could, at the same time, produce electricity, desalinate, and make hydrogen. There isn't any good reason not to. There is plenty of coastline that is not in someone's back yard, too.

I've been all over the deserts in the southwest, and there must be millions of acres that could be covered with solar collectors and not harm anything.

Doug