At the risk of sounding nuts, I’ll argue that conservation and responsible use of electricity for reasons other than saving money are counter productive. At the risk of sounding like a pure capitalist (of which I am not) we want to develop as much relatively safe electricity as possible because of all the things we can do with electricity in multiplying work. Conservation for the purpose of not developing the resource (as opposed to being tight) tends to move away from increasing supply and reducing demand, which means less electricity overall in the chain. An oversupply is better because it reduces the kwh cost and leaves surplus for things like water desalination during non-peak hours.
As much as I now like Jimmy Carter and sweaters, we need more windmills and solar.
Let me help you. the argument has been made we need lots of nuclear plants. But, if we can cut our use down a long way, we would not need them. can you follow that trail.
[QUOTE=pedescribe]
So what is going on with the plants now? Can someone other then The Second Stone, FXMastermind, levdrakon or gonzomax give me an update?
[/QUOTE]
Here is the current situation, as long as you believe what the IAEA is reporting.
There is also a section on that link above talking about the radiation monitoring going on, the the current levels they are seeing both around the plant, in the water and further out, if you are interested.
God but you’re a fucking moron. You have no concept of how much energy this country uses, do you, or how much can be saved by energy efficiency measures like the ones you mentioned?
Are you willing to give up your computer, and your access to places like Google? Because one of the biggest areas of growth in energy use in America right now is the multiplying server farms and associated infrastructure related to computing and the internet. This isn’t just about learning to turn lights off when you leave the room, or adding some building insulation and double-glazing.
Even with the best of intentions regarding more efficient and responsible energy use, our energy needs are still going to grow. As i’ve noted numerous times, if we could satisfy all these needs with clean, renewable energy sources, i’d be the first to jump on the bandwagon. But every study i’ve read suggests that this simply is not going to be possible.
Anyway, i’m not sure why i’m engaging you as if you were interested in the actual issues.
Well, this isn’t exactly news, as it’s been clear for quite a few years now that solar, like so much other technology, gets cheaper over time, and that it would inevitably approach and even surpass the cheapness of other energy sources.
But, to the extent that it is news, it’s obviously good news. Especially in places like southern California, where we have so much yearly sunlight, it seems crazy not to be making more use of solar energy. If and when we have the money to buy a place here in SoCal, the first thing i’ll look to do is put a decent-sized array of panels on the roof.
Your own link shows that most of the energy losses in the system are due to things like “waste heat from power plants, vehicles, and light bulbs.” While light bulbs might be part of the equation that individuals can influence, the vast majority of wasted energy comes from transportation, which is a very different energy efficiency problem than simply making energy efficient offices, which was your original point.
Your link shows that 40% of America’s energy use goes to transportation. I’m a big supporter of public transportation, and i fully agree with the argument made in the story that our obsession with cars and big houses and sprawling suburbs have contributed to our escalating energy use.
But this is, in many fundamental ways, a very different energy efficiency problem from the issue of generating electric power, which is the main question we’re addressing in this thread. Looking at total energy use is important, but while the vast majority of cars on the road are run by fossil fuels, the question of energy use in general is somewhat different from energy use as it relates to electricity production. While overall energy use could be reduced considerably by changing the way we move around, such dramatic changes in American transportation are very unlikely in the short or even the longer term, and reduction in use through things like building efficiency are very unlikely to offset our society’s spiraling demands for electrical power.
Conservation and efficiency are Good Things, and i support every step to promote them, but we need to be thinking about generation as well.
And the hits keep on coming. The radioactivity in the sea is going up again. It is far from being controlled. Hell. it has only been a month. Can’t expect too much.
And what most fluff heads don’t understand is that if you replace fossil fuels in cars with electric, that energy equivalent to the fossil fuels (the 40% you mentioned) has to come from somewhere. That is a lot of plants, wind farms and area taken up by solar panels.
The other solution is that we all go back to being serfs and never traveling more than a couple of miles from home in our lifetime.
What is the consequences of being tied to a single location because you can’t afford to move or travel to another job location?
Labour mobility is one of the reasons we have the lifestyle we currently enjoy today. It allows the best people to get to the locations they are wanted when needed.
Right now I can buy a house in a location many miles away from where I work. Because of that I can change jobs with little worry (obviously there is a commute time component) as to how I get to work. Without that ability to travel at will, I am tied to my current workplace. It is no different than those people who buy a house in a town dedicated to one industry (lumber for example). They are tied to that employer and have few options outside of it. If the employer closes down they lose the equity in their houses, if the employer wants to cut wages, then there is little they can do other than move.
Fossile fuels have to be replaced with an equivalent mechanism for people to move from one position to another. Whether it be from public transport, electric vehicles, or what have you. The problem with public transit is that it is demand driven. It doesn’t kick in until there is a demand for it which limits its effectiveness.