Quote:
Quote:
Going on to the whole Nuclear versus fossil fuel debate... Well, it's pretty convoluted, but from what I've gathered, fossil fuel emissions are responsible for plenty of deaths per year, and in the states the figure is in the tens of thousands. Quote:
Quote:
Otoh, nuclear fission has killed far fewer people, which is due to limited use and strict control of the waste stream. Fact is, centralized power generation will always be cleaner than distributed generation, and the worse the byproducts are, the more we will control their release. Coal releases more radioactive material into the environment than nuclear power does... Of course, there is the matter of waste disposal. Some byproducts can last for thousands of years, so there's some research going into transmutation. Quote:
*The implication being that there are probably a few million deaths per year due to fossil fuel emissions world wide. |
Quote:
I am now thinking of the emissions created to power the generation of automotive fuel. I know this is a stretch, but the gas powered car has its own emissions plus the emissions of the electric vehicle and whatever emissions are created during refinement. Plus all the heat generated. Gez where is my bike!!! :o I also read someplace which gives me hope that we can move on from petroleum power to another power source soon: "The stone age did not end because we ran out of stone" |
Quote:
thanks for the info....good stuff. :thumbup: |
Quote:
|
If by people with an agenda you mean the state of CA. Then yes.
Quote:
|
Quote:
CA refines ~15 billion gallons of gasoline per year, and this requires roughly 7,266 million KWh of electricity and 1,061 million Therms of natural gas. So that means that each gallon of gas requires about half a kWh to refine. Can an EV go 30 miles on half a kWh? The other thread also says: With an EV average of 250wh/mile, So that means that an EV can go two miles on the amount of electricity required to refine a gallon of gas, if you accept the figures in the other thread. A previous poster posted that Darell claimed 30 miles on that amount of electricity. Even if I didn't include something I was supposed to include, I don't think that that makes up for a 15x overstatement. And that is what I mean by "being misled by someone with an agenda." Anyway, bring on nuclear and grid charged EVs. It's the only thing that makes sense to me right now. |
The electricity used is actually pretty small like you stated. It's not explicitly the electricity, but primarily the use of natural gas for extraction/refining, which could be used in a power plant to generate electricity.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
MorningGaser -
Quote:
This will of course lead to other issues. When Solar goes into massive production, what will the production waste look like? Probably alot like electronics production waste. What I would like to see is a solar panel manufacturing plant with enough real estate to be powered on 100% solar power. That wouldn't solve the raw material transportation cost, but it would be a step in the right direction. I'll say it again and again. If you can solve the waste problem, I can accept nuclear power. But I have never seen a viable solution to the waste problem. The best I can think of is space-mailing it into the sun, which isn't a very thrifty-safe proposition. All of these other problems we are causing are what I would call "near term recoverable". That is to say, even with an ice age and mass extinctions, the Earth and human beings will survive in some capacity. The ecosystem will take a long time, but it will recover. In the case of nuclear power, in the event of civilization collapse, I see nuclear power plants eventually falling apart and having their cores melt down into the water table, contaminating regions for eons to come. The Earth will still recover, but instead of hundreds of years, it may come to thousands of years. CarloSW2 |
Quote:
Here's what I am thinking. A barrel of oil costs something like 60 bucks, or about $1.50 per gallon. A gallon of gas costs less than $2 at the refinery gate. 9kWh of electricity would cost, umm, a little less than 50 cents, I think, for a large refinery? That would mean that the refinery is barely breaking even. Which, right now, is not the case. So that is why I can't make it all go together. Here's where I'm at. I wish oil would get quite a bit more expensive so that people would be more motivated to find alternatives. That way, we might be able to have a "soft landing", wherein alternative technologies can grow at the right pace and help wean us off the oil. Thanks for helping to explain it to me. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.