<!--QuoteBegin-Thursday-+Aug 25 2004, 03:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thursday- @ Aug 25 2004, 03:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Oil runs out you won't have new pcs. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> WE NEEED TO THINK OF SOMETHING NOW.
NOW NOW NOW!!
TIME IS RUNNING OUT!
WITHOUT OIL, ALL-CAPS WILL BE GONE!
And I want back on the pirate ship <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Incorrect. Global warming can stuff up the global conveyor belts (the warm ocean currents that circulate through the pacific and atlantic oceans and such) meaning that warm water currents that create warm weather in some countries, namely britian, will alter course as the temperature rises (due to increased icebergs and an increasing amount of fresh water coming into the sea due to the melting polar cap) leading to localised cooling effect.
So it's really more complex then "OMGZ TEH WARMARING IS GOOING TO ROOOST USZOR!! F4! F4!@$#!@#!!!"
Bring on the Unity <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited August 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> crossing your fingers and hoping "they" come up with something is about the worst thing you can do. americans need to stop depending on "them" and start realizing that "we" are, at the same time, both the problem and the solution. "they" will probably come up with a better, cheaper form of energy sometime in the near future, but even such a omnipotent force as "they" require time and resources to come up with a solution. conservation on our part is the best way to provide "them" with these essentials.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Obliterater+Aug 25 2004, 02:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Obliterater @ Aug 25 2004, 02:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>Second</b>, A process has been developed to turn organic matter into oil. Currently a test facility has been built in Missouri.
<b>Summary:</b> Waste can now be turned into oil. It literaly eats organic garbage and outputs oil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Those of you who think we are going to run out of oil ought to read up on <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization' target='_blank'>Thermal Depolymerization</a> which allows fossil fuel to be made from any organic waste.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think that the "oil crisis" is overly hyped. Like CWAG said, it's about cheap oil, not the oil supply. Engineers have discovered new deposits, just not massive fields, as well as improving extraction technology.
However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for cheap alternatives. Personally, I don't think that solar is going to be the magic bullet that kills all of our energy woes. It's not practical for many places due to weather patterns. I know in Maine our winters are long, grey and snowy. Not the ideal situation for solar power generation. I guess we can't all have Southern California's weather. I think that wind power is going to be far more practical as a power source. Wind isn't as limited by weather and power production isn't restricted to daylight hours. I also think that biomass products could replace a lot of oil based items with more research.
The real problem with alternative energy sources right now is that they're more expensive than fossil fuels and most states require power companies to provide the cheapest power available. Wind power is of a comparable cost to oil and coal, but solar is still too expensive and impractical for utility-scale production.
However, I suspect that we'll see a lot of alternatives when oil stops being so profitable.
<!--QuoteBegin-zooby+Aug 25 2004, 09:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (zooby @ Aug 25 2004, 09:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But seriously, this year has been colder than before. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Global warming refers to warming on a large scale, as in tens of years. And yes, please recycle. I don't know why <b>anyone</b> would not recycle. Probably they lack the mental capacity to think of the reprecussions of failing to recycle.
<!--QuoteBegin-Mantrid+Aug 24 2004, 08:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mantrid @ Aug 24 2004, 08:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yeah, see, the whole problem with the Hydrogen fuel cell is that you need Hydrogen.
And whats the easiest way to get Hydrogen? From water of course! And how do you perform electrolisys on water? With electricity? And how do you generate electricity?
Fossil fuels.
So, its not really all that much a saviour unless we find a quick way to replace all the fossil fuel power-plants with nuclear/solar/hydroelectric/windmill power-planets very soon.
Or, get used to walking. A lot. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You can get hydrogen from water, however it is terribly costly in terms of the energy needed to extract it.
The cheapest and (currently majority) of hydrogen is extracted from hydrocarbons (fossil fuels)
The real thing we need to worry about with regard to an oil shortage, is how will we fly our planes and ship our goods over oceans?
I would like to personally thank MedHead and Obliterater for allowing me to think properly again <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Thursday-+Aug 25 2004, 02:58 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thursday- @ Aug 25 2004, 02:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-reasa+Aug 25 2004, 02:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (reasa @ Aug 25 2004, 02:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Nuclear energy is an excellent solution to tide us over after oil, it's reliable, it's clean -in its own way, and due to modern safety procedures it's pretty safe.
The only draw back is the waste, which will practically NEVER go away, the only answer for this I can think of is to jettison the waste into space. It's just not good for us to be putting it into the ground as it is, and if we were to rely on it much more heavily we would have to get ride of the waste this way.
I can't think of anything else? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ever heard of Chenobyl? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Reactors are not built like Chernobyl anymore.
Modern reactors cannot melt down as they never reach a high enough temperature.
<!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+Aug 25 2004, 05:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o @ Aug 25 2004, 05:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i don't think we're allowed to build nuclear plants in the us of a anymore, much less a hydroelectric dam B<. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think they're building a new power plant down the street.
<!--QuoteBegin-Epidemic+Aug 25 2004, 12:10 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Epidemic @ Aug 25 2004, 12:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Have solar platforms in the space, not dependant of weather (or day-night I think) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Um, and how exactly do you plan to get the power down to Earth?
<!--QuoteBegin-ThE HeRo+Aug 25 2004, 09:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ThE HeRo @ Aug 25 2004, 09:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+Aug 25 2004, 05:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o @ Aug 25 2004, 05:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i don't think we're allowed to build nuclear plants in the us of a anymore, much less a hydroelectric dam B<. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think they're building a new power plant down the street. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> the last nuclear power plant was builint in 1996. where do you live?
If you're scared about running out of power when oil goes down, move to Illinois. They have more nuclear reactors then they know what to do with, and Fermilab and Argonne Nat'l Laboratories, so if the **** hits the proverbial fan, I'm sure someone there could cook up a solution <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
A big solution to our quote "energy crisis" is solar. Main problem with solar is its inefficient and highly expensive. If we can lower costs, increase efficiency, it can and will be an attractive solution.
If this cheep solar cell technology does become cost efficient, I don’t what them employed in the conventional way of a large “solar farm”. What I hope would happen is that every roof of our house would be a power plant. If every American replace their shingles with solar cells that would = no energy crisis (renewable) and = clean source of energy. I don’t know if the utility companies would like it very much since their business model is constructed on the basis that they produce the <b>energy</b> and<b> provide infrastructure to supply it</b>. Not the consumer supply the energy and they provide the infrastructure. Energy companies like to think big, the bigger the power plant, the better.
If there are any aspiring euntrapanours (spelling?) there with a knack for science, this is a gigantic potential untapped market with billions and perhaps trillions dollars of potential profit.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, where do we get the hydrogen? Right now we get it from oil.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ahem?? hydrogene? Oil? I don't think so.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Reactors are not built like Chernobyl anymore.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Chernobyl was not exactly any more dangerous than any other reactor. I don't know the exact specifications, I think to remember the coolant system was somewaht different, but that is irrelevant.
Chernobyl blew up because the russians wanted to test the reactors limits. They wanted to test how far they can exceed safe temperatures and the reactor heated up that much until the mechanics to lower the control rods melted and the chainreaction could not be stopped.
It was simply because of dumbness.
I don't know how much you know about the construchtion of nuclear plants, but they are easy to contol and maintain. They are idiot proof. (under normal operation that is <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) There are the fuel elements. They emit radiation. Most notably neutrons. neutrons hit atoms and split them. More neutrons split more atoms and even more neutrons....
You get the idea. That reaction emits energy which heats up the primary cooling circuit. The hot coolant (water in most cases) is now led though pipes which reach into the second circle. The pipes are like heating elements that start to boil the water, which then is propelling the generators.
The chain reaction is controled by the control rods which are located between the fuel rods. They block the neutrons and thus prevent them from splitting atoms. Lower the control rods, and the reactor cools down. Raise the rod, the reactor heats up.
Simple. If it was dificult to control, the military would never ever have adapted nuclear power for warships.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And yes, please recycle. I don't know why anyone would not recycle. Probably they lack the mental capacity to think of the reprecussions of failing to recycle. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
because it produces unjustificable costs and is generally not nesesary? I don't know about other countries, but in Germany, we exessively separate garbage. It is actually an official law that garbage has to be seperated into biological (e.g moved lawn), paper, household garbadge (all from plastic to egshells) and glass.
This menans that we have about 4 times the cost for waste disposal than nesseary.
Recycling is an redundand concept for several reasons:
1: the stuff you seperate in your garbage gets trown on the same pile afterwards and gets burned in the same waste disposal. Plasic, paper, bio wastes...everything burnes in the same heating plant. Because these heating plants produce energy and are not sufficiently fueled otherwhise. Also, these plants have extremly high developed filter systems that clean the emissions very efficiently. They do not waste the air. we life in the year 2004 buddy, its not the 19th century, and we actually <i>did</i> singn the Kyoto protocol...
2: the chemical processes to refluidate plasics into oil are not efficient. To burn the plastic in heatng plants is cheaper and produces higher amount of energy. Think of it....you need energy to produce the oil, just to burn oil to produce energy.....sorry. Does not sound sane to me.
3: seperating glass or aluminium or even paper before the prosessing is not nessesary anymore. There are modern processing plants that automatically sort aut specific materials like glass, so they can be recycled while the rest goes on to get burned. That is far cheaper than 3 different trashcans that need to be emptied in every damn household in the country.
Please don't let me get started about wind and solar energay (that is <i>not </i>a spelling error).
Comments
WE NEEED TO THINK OF SOMETHING NOW.
NOW NOW NOW!!
TIME IS RUNNING OUT!
WITHOUT OIL, ALL-CAPS WILL BE GONE!
And I want back on the pirate ship <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
So it's really more complex then "OMGZ TEH WARMARING IS GOOING TO ROOOST USZOR!! F4! F4!@$#!@#!!!"
Bring on the Unity <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Obliterater+Aug 25 2004, 02:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Obliterater @ Aug 25 2004, 02:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>Second</b>, A process has been developed to turn organic matter into oil. Currently a test facility has been built in Missouri.
<b>Linkage:</b> <a href='http://www.discover.com/issues/jul-04/features/anything-into-oil/' target='_blank'>http://www.discover.com/issues/jul-04/feat...thing-into-oil/</a>
<b>Summary:</b> Waste can now be turned into oil. It literaly eats organic garbage and outputs oil.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Those of you who think we are going to run out of oil ought to read up on <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization' target='_blank'>Thermal Depolymerization</a> which allows fossil fuel to be made from any organic waste.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for cheap alternatives. Personally, I don't think that solar is going to be the magic bullet that kills all of our energy woes. It's not practical for many places due to weather patterns. I know in Maine our winters are long, grey and snowy. Not the ideal situation for solar power generation. I guess we can't all have Southern California's weather. I think that wind power is going to be far more practical as a power source. Wind isn't as limited by weather and power production isn't restricted to daylight hours. I also think that biomass products could replace a lot of oil based items with more research.
The real problem with alternative energy sources right now is that they're more expensive than fossil fuels and most states require power companies to provide the cheapest power available. Wind power is of a comparable cost to oil and coal, but solar is still too expensive and impractical for utility-scale production.
However, I suspect that we'll see a lot of alternatives when oil stops being so profitable.
Global warming refers to warming on a large scale, as in tens of years.
And yes, please recycle. I don't know why <b>anyone</b> would not recycle. Probably they lack the mental capacity to think of the reprecussions of failing to recycle.
And whats the easiest way to get Hydrogen? From water of course! And how do you perform electrolisys on water? With electricity? And how do you generate electricity?
Fossil fuels.
So, its not really all that much a saviour unless we find a quick way to replace all the fossil fuel power-plants with nuclear/solar/hydroelectric/windmill power-planets very soon.
Or, get used to walking. A lot. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You can get hydrogen from water, however it is terribly costly in terms of the energy needed to extract it.
The cheapest and (currently majority) of hydrogen is extracted from hydrocarbons (fossil fuels)
The real thing we need to worry about with regard to an oil shortage, is how will we fly our planes and ship our goods over oceans?
Look into free energy ideas if you're really concerned about it.
The only draw back is the waste, which will practically NEVER go away, the only answer for this I can think of is to jettison the waste into space.
It's just not good for us to be putting it into the ground as it is, and if we were to rely on it much more heavily we would have to get ride of the waste this way.
I can't think of anything else? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ever heard of Chenobyl? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reactors are not built like Chernobyl anymore.
Modern reactors cannot melt down as they never reach a high enough temperature.
I think they're building a new power plant down the street.
Um, and how exactly do you plan to get the power down to Earth?
I think they're building a new power plant down the street. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
the last nuclear power plant was builint in 1996. where do you live?
<a href='http://www.nei.org/doc.asp?catnum=3&catid=13' target='_blank'>http://www.nei.org/doc.asp?catnum=3&catid=13</a>
If this cheep solar cell technology does become cost efficient, I don’t what them employed in the conventional way of a large “solar farm”. What I hope would happen is that every roof of our house would be a power plant. If every American replace their shingles with solar cells that would = no energy crisis (renewable) and = clean source of energy. I don’t know if the utility companies would like it very much since their business model is constructed on the basis that they produce the <b>energy</b> and<b> provide infrastructure to supply it</b>. Not the consumer supply the energy and they provide the infrastructure. Energy companies like to think big, the bigger the power plant, the better.
If there are any aspiring euntrapanours (spelling?) there with a knack for science, this is a gigantic potential untapped market with billions and perhaps trillions dollars of potential profit.
Ahem?? hydrogene? Oil? I don't think so.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Reactors are not built like Chernobyl anymore.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Chernobyl was not exactly any more dangerous than any other reactor. I don't know the exact specifications, I think to remember the coolant system was somewaht different, but that is irrelevant.
Chernobyl blew up because the russians wanted to test the reactors limits. They wanted to test how far they can exceed safe temperatures and the reactor heated up that much until the mechanics to lower the control rods melted and the chainreaction could not be stopped.
It was simply because of dumbness.
I don't know how much you know about the construchtion of nuclear plants, but they are easy to contol and maintain. They are idiot proof. (under normal operation that is <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> )
There are the fuel elements. They emit radiation. Most notably neutrons. neutrons hit atoms and split them. More neutrons split more atoms and even more neutrons....
You get the idea. That reaction emits energy which heats up the primary cooling circuit. The hot coolant (water in most cases) is now led though pipes which reach into the second circle. The pipes are like heating elements that start to boil the water, which then is propelling the generators.
The chain reaction is controled by the control rods which are located between the fuel rods. They block the neutrons and thus prevent them from splitting atoms. Lower the control rods, and the reactor cools down. Raise the rod, the reactor heats up.
Simple.
If it was dificult to control, the military would never ever have adapted nuclear power for warships.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And yes, please recycle. I don't know why anyone would not recycle. Probably they lack the mental capacity to think of the reprecussions of failing to recycle. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
because it produces unjustificable costs and is generally not nesesary?
I don't know about other countries, but in Germany, we exessively separate garbage. It is actually an official law that garbage has to be seperated into biological (e.g moved lawn), paper, household garbadge (all from plastic to egshells) and glass.
This menans that we have about 4 times the cost for waste disposal than nesseary.
Recycling is an redundand concept for several reasons:
1: the stuff you seperate in your garbage gets trown on the same pile afterwards and gets burned in the same waste disposal. Plasic, paper, bio wastes...everything burnes in the same heating plant. Because these heating plants produce energy and are not sufficiently fueled otherwhise. Also, these plants have extremly high developed filter systems that clean the emissions very efficiently. They do not waste the air. we life in the year 2004 buddy, its not the 19th century, and we actually <i>did</i> singn the Kyoto protocol...
2: the chemical processes to refluidate plasics into oil are not efficient. To burn the plastic in heatng plants is cheaper and produces higher amount of energy.
Think of it....you need energy to produce the oil, just to burn oil to produce energy.....sorry. Does not sound sane to me.
3: seperating glass or aluminium or even paper before the prosessing is not nessesary anymore. There are modern processing plants that automatically sort aut specific materials like glass, so they can be recycled while the rest goes on to get burned.
That is far cheaper than 3 different trashcans that need to be emptied in every damn household in the country.
Please don't let me get started about wind and solar energay (that is <i>not </i>a spelling error).