The Age of Cheap Oil is Over

2011-04-29 06:29:08

#76

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:

As I understand it 30km x 30km would meet Australia's energy needs, 300kmx300km the entire world. I'm sure we can spare that much desert.

Aluminium - thats a very exotic material. Isn't most of the earth's crust made of that?
Right so have fun building enough solar panels to cover ninety thousand square kilometres. Have fun maintaining it too.
And the batteries required to provide energy for the other 8-23 hours of the day...

Let's not get ahead of ourselves now

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-04-29 06:30:03

#77

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5617|London, England

Spark wrote:
Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:

Right so have fun building enough solar panels to cover ninety thousand square kilometres. Have fun maintaining it too.
And the batteries required to provide energy for the other 8-23 hours of the day...
Let's not get ahead of ourselves now

Oh, I thought we were going to change the world.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-04-29 07:07:26

#78

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6975

Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:
Jay wrote:

And the batteries required to provide energy for the other 8-23 hours of the day...
Let's not get ahead of ourselves now
Oh, I thought we were going to change the world.

renewable man, we can use the power of the sun dawg /hippie

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2011-04-29 18:55:40

#79

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
As I understand it 30km x 30km would meet Australia's energy needs, 300kmx300km the entire world. I'm sure we can spare that much desert.

Aluminium - thats a very exotic material. Isn't most of the earth's crust made of that?
Right so have fun building enough solar panels to cover ninety thousand square kilometres. Have fun maintaining it too.
And the batteries required to provide energy for the other 8-23 hours of the day...

Really people, go look up solar-thermal with thermal storage.
Its about a zillion times simpler than coal with carbon capture and sequestration.

Mirrors are not hard to build BTW.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-04-29 18:58:48)

Fuck Israel

2011-05-01 03:27:57

#80

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6840|SE London

Dilbert_X wrote:
Aluminium - thats a very exotic material. Isn't most of the earth's crust made of that?

Not in any sort of useful form. If you want to use 15kWh/kg to refine it, then yeah, fine - but I thought this discussion was about trying to obtain energy, not waste it...

Much like the Hydrogen problem.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2011-05-01 03:28:22)

2011-05-01 05:36:17

#81

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Your argument was about exotic materials, not the energy cost.
Mirrors don't even need a lot of material to make a reflective surface, just a few atoms thick, so its barely a problem.

Pretty sure I could make a fairly big mirror from 1kg of Aluminium, lets assume I really suck at making mirrors and say 1 square metre for easy maths.
At 20% efficiency - of the oeverall system - that mirror would repay its energy cost in ~12 days of operation.
I'm not seeing a problem.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-05-01 05:54:04)

Fuck Israel

2011-05-01 05:49:00

#82

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6933|Canberra, AUS

You still have to explain how you're going to build and maintain 90000km^2 of expensive mirrors and electrical equipment. Aluminium is not renowned for its longevity.

I'm fairly sure silver is still the material of choice for solar-thermal mirrors.

Last edited by Spark (2011-05-01 05:54:17)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-05-01 05:56:20

#83

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Dunno, hire people to do it?

Recoat the mirrors when needed?

We manage to keep office building windows clean for example, aluminium survives pretty well in the desert - which australia mostly is.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-01 05:57:20

#84

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

I'm fairly sure silver is still the material of choice for solar-thermal mirrors.

Fine, a few atoms of silver on glass - which is fairly hard-wearing - and we're done.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-01 06:23:13

#85

jord: Member; +2,382|6937|The North, beyond the wall.

I'm pretty sure the alternate energy situation is one that can't be remedied by people on a forum that have a passing interest in the subject.

2011-05-01 06:37:01

#86

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6840|SE London

Dilbert_X wrote:
Your argument was about exotic materials, not the energy cost.
Mirrors don't even need a lot of material to make a reflective surface, just a few atoms thick, so its barely a problem.

Pretty sure I could make a fairly big mirror from 1kg of Aluminium, lets assume I really suck at making mirrors and say 1 square metre for easy maths.
At 20% efficiency - of the oeverall system - that mirror would repay its energy cost in ~12 days of operation.
I'm not seeing a problem.

My argument? I'm pretty sure I haven't made any argument either way....

I'm just pointing out the obvious stupidity of the sentiment that because aluminium is abundant, that means it is easy to get lots of it. It isn't, because of the high refinement costs, of which the energy outlay is only a small constituent.

2011-05-01 06:53:21

#87

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:
My argument? I'm pretty sure I haven't made any argument either way....

Spark wrote:
So which massive desert do you intend on covering with said solar-thermal (the claim of which "no exotic materials" are required interests me by the way. Those mirrors don't make themselves shiny)

The only question is whether there is a net energy return, aluminium is cheaper to produce than say silver - which isn't that expensive either.
When they are used a few atoms thick, on say a mylar film the energy cost is trivial.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-01 06:54:56

#88

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6840|SE London

Dilbert_X wrote:
Spark wrote:
My argument? I'm pretty sure I haven't made any argument either way....
Spark wrote:
So which massive desert do you intend on covering with said solar-thermal (the claim of which "no exotic materials" are required interests me by the way. Those mirrors don't make themselves shiny)
The only question is whether there is a net energy return, aluminium is cheaper to produce than say silver - which isn't that expensive either.
When they are used a few atoms thick, on say a mylar film the energy cost is trivial.

Maybe if you tried using quote tags correctly....

2011-05-01 06:56:56

#89

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Err, no it isn't. There is kind of a thing called practicality and scale issues.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-05-02 01:36:01

#90

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:
Err, no it isn't. There is kind of a thing called practicality and scale issues.

So?

Fuck Israel

2011-05-02 01:39:31

#91

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6933|Canberra, AUS

So it's the difference between a pipe dream and something which is actually realistic and actionable. Like developing MSTR.

Hint: I don't like pipe dreams.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-05-02 05:28:54

#92

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Its perfectly practical, as practical as any other energy system, it just hasn't caught on yet.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-02 05:30:35

#93

11 Bravo: Banned; +965|5496|Cleveland, Ohio

(US question)question about oil. lets assume the govt did not tax us for gas at all. so, basically the stations just get the gas from the big companies. would the cost of gas only be like 1.50 a gallon or something right now?

2011-05-02 05:31:09

#94

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6933|Canberra, AUS

Dilbert_X wrote:
Its perfectly practical, as practical as any other energy system, it just hasn't caught on yet.

i give up.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-05-02 05:33:53

#95

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

Why do you claim its impractical? Compared with nuclear its a doddle.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-02 05:35:26

#96

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX

11 Bravo wrote:
(US question)question about oil. lets assume the govt did not tax us for gas at all. so, basically the stations just get the gas from the big companies. would the cost of gas only be like 1.50 a gallon or something right now?

Does it matter?
The cheaper it is the more people will buy bigger SUVs and burn it faster until the supply falls so the price rises back to where it was.
The govt taxing it is doing you a favour.

Fuck Israel

2011-05-02 05:37:43

#97

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5844

11 Bravo wrote:
(US question)question about oil. lets assume the govt did not tax us for gas at all. so, basically the stations just get the gas from the big companies. would the cost of gas only be like 1.50 a gallon or something right now?

Fuel taxes in the United States vary by state. The United States federal excise tax on gasoline, as of February 2011, is 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon for diesel fuel. In January 2011, motor gasoline taxes averaged 48.1 cents per gallon and diesel fuel taxes averaged 53.1 cents per gallon.[8] For the first quarter of 2009, the mean state gasoline tax is 27.2 cents per US gallon, plus 18.4 cents per US gallon federal tax making the total 45.6 cents per US gallon (12.0 ¢/L)

Nope. Besides the market sets the price for oil so that whole "drill everywhere in the U.S." thing wouldn't make a difference either.

2011-05-02 05:40:02

#98

11 Bravo: Banned; +965|5496|Cleveland, Ohio

that doesnt add up, macbeth. we get taxed more than that for gas.

2011-05-02 05:41:46

#99

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5437|Sydney

11 Bravo wrote:
(US question)question about oil. lets assume the govt did not tax us for gas at all. so, basically the stations just get the gas from the big companies. would the cost of gas only be like 1.50 a gallon or something right now?

We pay around $1.50 per litre here, whereas in the US it is currently around $1 per litre.
I was told recently our government also taxes our petrol higher than you folks in the US, so I doubt you would be paying something that low with world oil prices as they are.

2011-05-02 05:43:31

#100

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5844

11 Bravo wrote:
that doesnt add up, macbeth. we get taxed more than that for gas.

http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes … ax-Map.pdf
Click link for map.
http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/
From the American petrol Institute.

BF2S Forums The Age of Cheap Oil is Over

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

Board footer