Re: Running on hydrogen?
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jym Dyer <jym@e...> wrote:
> > I mean, how would you power a carfree city? 100 percentHow is this off-topic? You gotta power that huge rail system with
> > windmills? It'd never work. Tuck in a pair of nuclear plants
> > out in the industrial districts and now you're talking! :)
> =v= I'm not going to rehash an off-topic nuclear power debate
> on this list.
something, right? Have to keep the lights on in all those high-
density housing units. Got to keep the economic engine ticking over
reliably, right? Magical pixie-dust power won't cut it.
Also, to be honest, cars use a fairly small percentage of the USA's
energy. A modern industrialized economy is a hungry mother, and
unless we want to look at radical changes in the economy even beyond
ditching the automobile, we're going to have to feed the economy lots
Here, check this .pdf:
That paper shows that in 2000, the USA consumed a total of 98.5
Quadrillion BTU's of primary energy. Of that, only 26.6 Quads was
used for transportation, and even carfree cities won't displace all
> Anything I might have to say on the matter wasSo, you're basicaly stuck in the past and have no defense for your
> said 30 years ago by Amory Lovins, and about the massive costs
> of decommissioning in particular, 20 years ago by Karl Hess.
baseless comments? :)
How about a more up-to-date look at things:
According to that paper, $22.5 billion has been set aside already to
decommission the US nuclear fleet, with many more billions to come.
This is money charged to you, me, and everybody else who uses nuclear
electricity, and is not charged to the government.
> =v= As for what I'd so, it's the same thing I've been sayingName said sources, please.
> for the four years I've been on this list: work on the city's
> infrastructure, particularly the transportation infrastructure,
> so as not to waste so much energy in the first place. That way
> they can be powered largely, if not totally, from clean energy
Windmills? Excellent powersource, except that wind has low capacity
factors and is intermittant.
Hydro? Wonderful source of power, except it has stringent siting
issues, and droughts can be worrisome.
Solar? Passive solar thermal is on the ragged edge of viabillity,
photovoltaic is completely out of the question.
Natural gas? Seen the price of gas lately? :)
> Ads below? Just ignore 'em.