Thread: So you think I'm an idiot?? Check this out..Obama solar proposal...

Originally Posted by blackgang

am still in fair shape for an old man and in damn good shape for 75.

you are posting in your diaper,

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

Originally Posted by Panda I have to say I just dont get the logic of putting solar panel along highways in preference to out in the desert somewhere.

Right you are Pandy

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Over long distances only as DC because you run into problems when the cable reaches the wavelenght of your power frequency. For long distance transport DC is already in use.

And yes DC is the way to go on long distance lined and it now in practice.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Whenever a solar future is discussed and figures are presented a big mixup happens. Many times figures are quoted comparing solar power to the present consumption of electricity. That gives a wrong look on the situation because electricity is the most expensive energy and is used only where it is required. It also has only a relatively small percentage of total power consumption.

But the lines are in to transfer electricity from east to west already and trucking and motor freight is most likely the main energy users,

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

First off the politics of acquiring that amount of land for this purpose (not in my backyard so to speak when my plan puts it in everyone's backyard equally) like I said it would require the land surface area approximately the size of New Mexico and it would take decades to accomplish through the politics when the land is already government owned.. Secondly the impact that the amount of required land would have on the environment and thirdly the amount of maintenance would be squired to keep mother earth from overwhelming it for example, even in the desert it is necessary to beat back the elements constantly....

To beat back the desert, is not such a big deal, I lived in the desert a few times in my life, and there are thousands of acres or if you like Sq, Miles already owned by the US and state govts. Death valley is damn hot is damn sunny and it is also below sea level,
the Mojave is mostly Govt owned, large hunk of Nevada is Govt owned, as is a lot of states in the sun belt where the solar should be installed so why build an overhead roof over freeways at over a billion dollars a mile when all that land is standing idle and useless,, and the transmission lines are already in and as the solar comes online the power houses will be going off so the lines will still carry the juice, just from a different source, it it was going to work, which it wont anyway,

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

Thirdly it would require additional cost to build the necessary separate infrastructure to transfer the power from the desert to the areas where it is needed and having it all located in one place or several places such as the west coast for example which is where the deserts are located in the states it is impractical as you lose many hours of energy production while the sun is over the east coast..

So this was answered by the preceding answer,, the lines are already in and juice will go either way, kinda like Butterfly.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

However the cost per kW installed solar power is high and will remain high even if it drops as is hoped for.

Time of production is relative, if you're really up to it as you seem to be you're aware that there are ways of increasing production through magnification and various other techniques, the loss in production due to a drop in intensity for example would not be nearly as great as a loss and the additional cost of producing energy in one location thousands of miles away and using any means to store and transport that energy in the opposite direction..As well the drop off would be minimal over the entirety of the grid, length of time is still length of time, it's intensity that needs to be increased and as stated there are ways of doing that, but that loss is already factored in and is negligible..

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Such a grid could be established inclucing the northern desert belt, starting with the Sahara, over the Arab Peninsula all the way through China.

Well this is no solution to independence is it? This kind of defeats the purpose entirely.. Nor do I believe it is necessary, optimum maybe, but not long for this world, requires far too much Utopian thought process to be put in place in this century..or maybe even the next..

Originally Posted by blackgang

So you mean that with never having met me , you thought I was silly enough to bankroll your importing junk RV trailers to Phuket from the US ports and set back and watch you piss off my money.

that's how confidence men work

Originally Posted by blackgang

Maybe I should have went to school and then I could be an ENGINEER like you with a sheepskin on my wall and then we could get together and smoke some of that kick ass shit you smoking and come up with some duzy ideas, And have plenty of money to just lay around and fuck the dog and think up stuff and write letters to Osama. OBAMA damn it.

dont panic, blackgang, he didnt go to school either.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

if someone can get so fried and vilified for even making the proposal.

you aint being viliifed for making a proposal, you are being laughed at for not doing any basic research on the engineering behind it and for trying to pretend that you have solved the problem adn that the Obama admiinstration will listen to you for half a second.

oh and because you get narky when people point out the flaws in your ill concieved plans.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

We don't display any sort of united front so why should there be any change? The oil companies and the governments are just taking the path of least resistance and this thread is a sad example of why that occurs.

this thread is an example of why governments and oil companies continue to do what they want?



deluded.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

Why couldn't you make intelligent and informative posts like this in the beginning instead of taking the insulting and demeaning tact that you did initially?? It would have made for much more enlightening and informative debate..

Why couldnt you have actually shown some intelligence at the start of this thread as they shouldnt have to point out obviosu flaws in your plan.

here ia land not being used and damn near the size on NM.
I lived here in 43 and 44 , my stepdad was opening a copper mine there and we rented a house from the post mistress.

KEELER CALIFORNIA

Originally Posted by blackgang

Miles already owned by the US and state govts. Death valley is damn hot is damn sunny and it is also below sea level, the Mojave is mostly Govt owned, large hunk of Nevada is Govt owned, as is a lot of states in the sun belt where the solar should be installed so why build an overhead roof over freeways at over a billion dollars a mile when all that land is standing idle and useless,, and the transmission lines are already in and as the solar comes online the power houses will be going off so the lines will still carry the juice, just from a different source, it it was going to work, which it wont anyway,

These are public and natural sanctuary's not for this use and would require serious efforts to get them appropriated for such a purpose I.E. oil drilling, and what happens when you shade thousands of square miles of desert with solar panels BG?? You think that might have some potentially adverse effects on the surrounding environment??

I can't debate with you because you have no thought process prior to your posting..Your posting has a certain feminine logic behind it...

Originally Posted by blackgang

So this was answered by the preceding answer,, the lines are already in and juice will go either way, kinda like Butterfly.

BG there's far more involved than that, you over simplify..it requires it's own independent infrastructure first and then it is integrated in to the current grid..

Right now, coal, oil and nuclear are the cheapest sources of power and nothing much is going to change until alternative green power can compete on an economic basis. The drawbacks of existing systems have been well documented and virtually all people in western countries are well aware of them. But when it comes to a choice between cheap power or the much more expensive green power its no contest. We could all have clean green power today if we were prepared to pay for it. Setting up the infrastructure to produce green power is horribly expensive, but it is happening a little bit at a time. It will happen for sure, just as horse stables gradually gave way to gas stations.

There are proposals to put giant solar collection arrays in orbit and beam the energy back to earth via Lasers. The plan is quite feasible using current technology but the cost is absolutely prohibitive at present. One day something like that will happen I am certain. A continuous source of power beamed to any place on earth. Hydrogen powered cars, all from the power of the sun. But it wont happen in my lifetime and I doubt it will happen in my daughters lifetime either.

The big thing stopping alternative green energy at the moment is the unmanageable infrastructure costs to set it all up and cost effectiveness of running it compared to traditional methods of power generation.

There have been a lot of gains in green energy in some areas. Eg: geothermal energy is being produced economically in some places, Iceland for instance.

The ultimate holy grail of energy production is nuclear FUSION as oppose to nuclear Fission. Its theoretically possible but no scientist has been able to perfect it yet. Maybe someday that will happen. If it does, we will have and endless supply of energy virtually for free.

Bottom line is that its got to happen sooner or later, but we wont be around to see it.

I think the space solar idea is a bit silly.

For starters, all the electrical cables coming down to earth would look ridiculous and be at the mercy of violant weather.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

The ultimate holy grail of energy production is nuclear FUSION as oppose to nuclear Fission. Its theoretically possible but no scientist has been able to perfect it yet. Maybe someday that will happen. If it does, we will have and endless supply of energy virtually for free.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Probably we will be able to have fusion one day. But then we would have a sustainable source for electricity. All the other needs, like for transportation, raw material for chemical industry, process energy, and heating would still be unsolved. So it would be one big building block but we need others as well. Besides fusion plants need cooling water like fossil plants that limits their use.

My personal guess for a big part of the solution will be biotechnology. Scientists are already working on genetically improved and even completely artificial life forms. What we need is an organism like the green algae which can multiply rapidly and produce biomass in form of oil and fibre, which can also be converted to an energy source. The problem with algae is their need for a suitable temperature of the water they grow in. So we need artificial algae, that are able to perform photosynthesis at temperatures of 50-60°C. So we need to develop some replacement of chlorophyll and an organism that works at these temperatures.

It is a tough call to develop something like this but I see it on the horizon. Then we get an energy source which can be stored, transported, used as raw material for industry, fertilizers, .... and we can basically use the existing infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Time of production is essential. If you get only half the sunshine time you get only half the power even if you use concentration of sunlight.

Of course, that's not what I meant. We aren't talking the difference in exposure here between Arizona and Alaska, I'm only referring to the east coast versus the west coast and that varies minimally..

As for maintenance in terms of cleaning etc. as was mentioned previously, I guess the Mars rovers are proving that not quite as critical a factor as many thought since they've been working well past their predicted sell by date in a much harsher and dirty environment..

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Originally Posted by Takeovers

The ultimate holy grail of energy production is nuclear FUSION as oppose to nuclear Fission. Its theoretically possible but no scientist has been able to perfect it yet. Maybe someday that will happen. If it does, we will have and endless supply of energy virtually for free.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Probably we will be able to have fusion one day. But then we would have a sustainable source for electricity. All the other needs, like for transportation, raw material for chemical industry, process energy, and heating would still be unsolved. So it would be one big building block but we need others as well. Besides fusion plants need cooling water like fossil plants that limits their use.

I certainly am not holding my breath on the fusion solution as clearly stated in my post.

As for "all the other needs" re transportation and heating, I think you underestimate the versatility of electricity. Anything that can be powered by a oil based combustion engine can be powered by an electric motor. And of course water can be converted into hydrogen and oxygen via electrolysis using electricity. Hydrogen is already being used as a non polluting substitute for oil based fuels in some mass transit systems. And of course electric cars and trains are well established now.

Electricity can also be used for heating and is in places where gas is more expensive.

In relation to fusion plants needing water for cooling and that limiting their use, I really dont understand what you are talking about. And I doubt you do either.

Re raw materials for chemical plants, things like plastics can be produced from any hydrocarbons, not just as a by-product of oil conversion into petrol or dieseline. There would be nothing at all to stop the plastics industry from using oil or many other of the available hydrocarbon forms in continuing the production of current oil based chemicals and products.

Times change, civilization adapts. If and when nuclear fusion is ever developed to become the worlds power source, the problems you site would be of no impedance whatsoever. Basically, you are talking through your arse.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

These are public and natural sanctuary's not for this use and would require serious efforts to get them appropriated for such a purpose I.E. oil drilling, and what happens when you shade thousands of square miles of desert with solar panels BG?? You think that might have some potentially adverse effects on the surrounding environment??

Well all you want everyone to think that you are an intelligent fellow and I think that if you are so smart, then why ain't you rich??
You really love to argue and will not let go if proven wrong,, how about that degree in lawn maint or gardening or what ws it now??

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

and isn't going to produce any immediate jobs particularly on a large scale as was the plan behind my proposal

Thats just the thing.
All the advances in civilization have been ones that create less jobs.
Things that do the work for us and are more productive.

I am sure the labourers saw the invention of the steam-shovel as a threat to their employment back then. But how could we build skyscrapers with men digging the foundations by hand and cement being hoisted up over pulleys drawn by horses. Its a no brainer to create work for people just for works sake.

If governments are going to spend money creating jobs it has to be the most efficient and economic expenditure to benefit the community.

Originally Posted by blackgang

Well all you want everyone to think that you are an intelligent fellow and I think that if you are so smart, then why ain't you rich??

The same could be said of all of us here BG.

You dont have to be intelligent to be rich, and you dont have to be dumb to be poor. Sometimes it just comes down to the breaks in life and personal ethics.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

I do wonder why you respond all offended, it definately wasn't meant to be and on rereading I really don't know why your reaction was like that. OK, no problem this is TeakDoor after all.

yes well he may have been a bit sensitive but you certainly came into this with no less a personal agenda towards me so fair play to Panda.. Just glad that finally there are a few here who are finally able to discuss the OP in it's intended context all others shall remain on the sidelines where I'm concerned...

Originally Posted by Panda

Originally Posted by blackgang

Well all you want everyone to think that you are an intelligent fellow and I think that if you are so smart, then why ain't you rich??

The same could be said of all of us here BG.

You dont have to be intelligent to be rich, and you dont have to be dumb to be poor. Sometimes it just comes down to the breaks in life and personal ethics.

Truer words were never spoken, I could dedicate an entire thread on stupid rich people...Or another way of saying it is that wealth is not necessarily a measure of one's intelligence quotient..and right now there is a heap of formerly well off people licking their wounds wishing they were smart enough to have avoided people like Madoff and now Stanford. Yeah they were rich but at what cost of morality? As are hundreds of drug traffickers ..

The real travesty behind crooks like them is that they've made it that much more difficult for people with sincere investment need and worthy ideas such as mine to get any real investors interested out of fear of being duped..
All it does is stifle creativity and new approaches to old problems..

But still you do not seem to realise how much it cosys per mile of regular freeway or an overcrossing and you are talking of thousands of miles of them and even running maglev trains on them so that took away your excuse to just break em open at interchanges.
And putting in solar farms in the desert has not hurt any that I have seen or heard about, look at southern calif, thousand acres of them.
And they already own the desert and no one even walks on it, I j\have lived in that area recently too. and have friends that still do, one has 96 sq miles of it leased for cattle range and it will not support 1 cow.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

I can't debate with you because you have no thought process prior to your posting..Your posting has a certain feminine logic behind it...

Not at all, but I do know what it costs to do a lot less than you have proposed, and I do have a cousin that has a fair sized construction co. in Portland Rogers Const co. has a few hot plants, a few permanent crushers and a few concrete batch plants, plus portable plants and heavy equipment.
So I am not ignorant to what it takes to do a job, and you are way out there with this Idea Obama or not.
If you were just shooting the shit and dreaming but you are serious.

Originally Posted by blackgang

But still you do not seem to realise how much it cosys per mile of regular freeway or an overcrossing and you are talking of thousands of miles of them and even running maglev trains on them so that took away your excuse to just break em open at interchanges.

Over time... BG...time, not over night! Was Rome built in a day? Do you think it is going to get cheaper in the future? is anything required to build ANY infrastructure going to get cheaper over time as raw materials and such are more and more in demand for things like houses as well?..

It also includes corporate investment in exchange for future returns so not exclusively tax payer money..As well I only mentioned an occasional cut off why does a high speed rail train need to go straight through to anywhere? Does that occur now? Or do they go in different directions and on different paths, this offers them the ability to do that in concert with the highway system for convenience and expediency while cutting major costs on infrastructure development and making it safer by elevating it in congested areas such as cities for example..

Does that mean it has to be in conjunction with this system over it's entire route?? Likely not at all, out on the plains or in the deserts where it is feasible for it to go off in other directions safely but there is no set of rules here and that is it's biggest bonus....It offers OPTIONS..... Very 1 dimensional thinking on your part in every aspect BG..

I'm not going to explain every little nuance of what should be common sense to anyone, let alone someone of your supposed "experience"??
Like for example you don't think it is possible for this system to just bypass a given interchange if it so structurally congested already for example?? Reroute just a few miles east, west, north or south of that interchange for just a mile or 2 and then rejoin with the highway down the line? How would that adversely effect the grid or it's system? Please explain? Your eminence?? That wouldn't negate the benefit of the entire system function on those rare occasions when it would be required..

My take for so much opposition is that your just disappointed and envious it wouldn't be completed in your lifetime so your pissing all over the idea.. Especially losing out on your senior citizens discount passes..

BTW mods pretty slow on removing that other trash by that time it was pretty much inconsequential..

Originally Posted by blackgang

But still you do not seem to realise how much it cosys per mile of regular freeway or an overcrossing and you are talking of thousands of miles of them and even running maglev trains on them so that took away your excuse to just break em open at interchanges.
And putting in solar farms in the desert has not hurt any that I have seen or heard about, look at southern calif, thousand acres of them.
And they already own the desert and no one even walks on it, I j\have lived in that area recently too. and have friends that still do, one has 96 sq miles of it leased for cattle range and it will not support 1 cow.

You are right but I do give DF credit for one thing. It might be not too easy to use desert land for solar. If you try you can be sure that some environmentalists will go through it with a fine comb and come up with some kind of tumbleweed or scorpion or dung beetle that is in danger of extinction in that area and argue the plant can't go there.

But that does not make highways a more suitable alternative.