Jump to content
Science Forums

Finding New Ways Of Getting Our Energy And Crating Non-polluting Technologies Are Critical. !


Howard36
 Share

Recommended Posts

I read Partnering with Nature: The Wild Path to Reconnecting with the Earth, a which won the top prize for Social Change in the “Best Books 2010” competition and the book highlights a shift in the way we work with nature and the environment. From solar energy to harnessing the natural cleaning powers of nature used in a “Living Machine”, that transforms waste water to potable water using plants sunlight, the book explores some of the most promising bio-industries of our time...it also highlights the rising incidence of eco-entrepreneurs and bio-technologies that can transform the way that we live and work.

 

"Partnering” also makes the link between human health and the environment - citing a recent study which found that Americans spend less than one hour a week outside!!! and asserts that this is leading to all kinds of physical, emotional and spiritual ailments…..

 

I got a copy of the book at Amazon.com (http://tinyurl.com/yh4pkam) and find the author's ideas to be quite revolutionary... Catriona MacGregor is seen as a leader in a rising Eco-consciousness movement… While I do not agree with everything – the book has a powerful message that illuminates the fact that our connection to nature is a vital part of our existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key words seem to me to be "no ready replacement", and I would add the word affordable. But, what if we took all that money we spend arguing about global warming and climate change and spent it researching and developing some new technologies.

 

I stopped using oil to heat my house three years ago and now burn wood pellets. I am favorably impressed with the performance of my pellet stoves, and I have saved money. That was my primary motivation in making the switch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The spring semester of my freshman year in college in 1987, I recall one of my engineering professors showing us a video of a mini-van made by Vovlo. Vulvo had made a diesel powered mini-van that they claimed achieved 70 miles per gallon. The video even demonstrated that you could pour corn oil purchased at the supermarket right into the fuel tank. The professor told us the vehicle would not be marketed because gasoline was too cheap, and there was no market for such a high mileage vehicle. At the time diesel was selling for around $1.10 per gallon.

 

For those who like the currently available gas-electric hybrid technology, just imagine (or even calculate) what kind of mileage could be achieved with a diesel-electric hybrid. I would be willing to bet 100 mpg should be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The technology has been in use for many years, wind, solar, and hydro. Tranforming energy into usable electricity will always come at a cost, but why not utilize energy from a source with seemingly endless power. Burning fossil fuels is only a quick and temperatory solution, that people are capitalizing. Single family homes can be self-sufficient, but not cost effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, what is everyone waiting for? How much money has been wasted trying to prove or disprove the human caused global climate change? Why not just get on top of the problem of finding more efficient, less polluting, and less costly solutions to our energy demands?

 

You might be interested in what Andrea Rossi does. If his claims are valid then a new kind of a nuclear reactor will become operational in October 2011. Look at:

 

http://scienceforums.com/topic/23336-low-energy-nickel-hydrogen-fusion-reaction/

 

Personally, I would not bet on his success. But I would be extremely happy to see his claims confirmed. The most unbelievable claim is turning the fuel (nickel powder) into copper.

 

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)

Professor Emeritus

Montclair State University, USA

 

.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

You might be interested in what Andrea Rossi does. If his claims are valid then a new kind of a nuclear reactor will become operational in October 2011. Look at:

 

http://scienceforums.com/topic/23336-low-energy-nickel-hydrogen-fusion-reaction/

 

Personally, I would not bet on his success. But I would be extremely happy to see his claims confirmed. The most unbelievable claim is turning the fuel (nickel powder) into copper.

 

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)

Professor Emeritus

Montclair State University, USA

 

 

Why am I skeptical? This is explained at

 

http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/rossi.html

 

But many reputable people take Rossi's claim seriously, as illustrated by the content of the link below.

 

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/video.php?id=23096

 

....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzL3RIlcwbY

 

.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What do you mean we need new methods? We already have them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98frSed0F5s&feature=player_embedded

 

We know the physics works. 300 reactor years of fast-breeders says so.

 

We just need to rush-build the commercialised prototype, and then put these beasts on the assembly line! Then we'll have the cheapest nuclear power ever. Rather than being a hand crafted, individual project 'Rolls Royce' they'll come off the assembly line like so many Hyundai's. The S-PRISM will have modular pieces that shoot off the assembly line and are trucked to site and then clipped together like so much giant-sized lego. It will drastically cut costs and time.

 

And the safety? These babies build it into the REACTOR RODS THEMSELVES! The laws of physics take over when Homer Simpson falls asleep and doesn't see a Tsunami approaching! The reactor CORE itself is a safety feature, with neutron leak built in. (As the rods expand when they overheat they leak neutrons, shutting down the reaction).

 

All it takes is a little legislation, because Billy Boy (Bill Clinton) got freaked out about the "P" word and made these babies illegal. He didn't understand that IFR plutonium isn't pure enough to build bombs and go boom, but is just pure enough to run a reaction in a reactor. Basically there are cheaper ways to build bombs. And 93% of the world's carbon comes from the BIG economies like Europe, China, America who already have bombs! It's like shutting the gate after the horses have bolted, bred like Brumbies, and become a plague! Bombs should be banned, but not nuclear power!

 

I'm sick of playing games with carbon prices and emissions trading schemes and all that jazz. Let's just nationalise energy and build it already!

 

GE has a model that sounds nearly ready to go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-PRISM

 

One we build a bunch of GenIV nukes we could theoretically shut down uranium mining for 500 years while they eat through the existing stockpiles of nuclear waste. (Coughs... I meant once-through nuclear fuel ;) ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...