Page 4 of 4

Re: World News

PostPosted: 03.25.17 6:07pm
by Remnants
More along the lines of technology but yes also science. Interesting point made about energy however it's not indefinite the sand needed for fraking tightly bound oil is not always available though it can be produced at a high cost ... one may argue that the cost is still worth it personally I'm not sure. Regardless it is not infinite the only infinite energy sources worth further presuing for earth is perpetual energy which I'm pretty sure is breaking reality/impossible and fusion which keeps burning up and melting down at least for now. I don't think it can be done in time. I don't think energy supply will last long enough for humanity to shed the infinite growth economy and collapses under its own pressures. Could be very wrong. history is also full of surprises and 180's.
Its not like we'll be forced to return to biomass like the pre-industrial revolution either. Solar and wind will remain sources of energy and while it may be true that they are inadequate in being the sole providers of energy in the infinite-growth economy, they could still prove to be sufficient for a post-growth economy which, and I can't reiterate this enough, would be far more conservative in its appetite for energy than an infinite growth economy. Sure, solar and wind are intermittent but energy storage can be used to absorb the surpluses and provide during times of deficit -- just more so than without storage. Solar and wind energy are here to stay since the sun won't be going out any time soon and wind is after all created by insolation on the planet. Not making any use whatsoever of these sources of energy in a post-growth economy would be simply foolish. As for the kind of battery, that would be the Nickel-Iron battery, otherwise known as the Edison battery. The reason for this particular battery is as follows, according to Open Source Ecology:
[*]Long lifetime of 50 years
[*]Open source design of electrodes
[*]Cells scalable: from 1 to 50kW hrs
[*]Nickel and iron obtained from scrap stream, reprocessed via Induction Furnace
[*]Completely closed loop material cycle ecology
This should also make it clear as to how goods will be like in a post-growth economy: designed for durability and recyclability. Sure, it won't be anything like the luxurious and frivolous infinite growth economy but it'll be good enough for a post-growth economy.

If Open Source Ecology is any indication, innovation in such a post-growth economy will be the drive towards doing more with less in terms of energy, logistics and resources. Innovation in an infinite growth economy has really been all about making things faster (that usually means bigger) and more powerful in order to increase throughput at a large scale. Since a post-growth economy is all about sustainability -- or consuming as much as can be recycled and renewed -- it will invariably operate more slowly and in doing so, void the need to grow production without end. Now, if you're talking about endeavors such as space travel, I believe it to still be possible but the post-growth economy would first need to mature. Such an endeavor would require mass collaboration and collection of resources. Products of engineering that require a lot of resources and energy will still be around but only in applications that are either critical or simply in very high demand.

Re: World News

PostPosted: 03.25.17 9:27pm
by metroidsuperfan11
Never said abandon wind energy just saying that in some places in the world. An example the equator it will produce less energy quite possibly to the point where it won't be able to power beyond basic systems I was just pointing out that it's not really viable in some areas. Also I would NEVER suggest going back to biomass. Your arguments do seem more and more convincing but I don't know ... how could I. Anyway in other news I've figured out what was wrong with tpp and found other news as well.

(ttp ^) ... orea-syria

(sanctions ^) ... maduro-un/

(venezuela running out of medicine ^) ... -war-19847

(american made defense better then russian tank defense ^) (unless you know that's totally bull in which case I'd be interested to learn about it)

Re: World News

PostPosted: 11.22.17 10:25pm
by Remnants
Site's buggy tonight.

So, the following happened: Mexico secured a Power Purchase Agreement with electricity company ENEL to buy solar electricity at $0.0177 per kWh. The kWh is a unit of energy and can also signify thermal energy instead of just electrical energy. To put this in perspective, $0.0177/kWh is equal to $5.19/mmBTU -- the metric one would consider if choosing between different fuels be they coal, oil, natural gas or biomass. According to the EIA, natural gas prices have been just above $3.00/mmBTU. Normally, to make electricity out of natural gas, you need an entire power plant to convert that thermal energy into electricity and that mode of energy conversion is far from perfect in terms of efficiency. According to the EIA, the lowest heat rate (hence more efficient power conversion process) is at 7603 BTUs/kWh (Natural gas, Combined cycle, 2011). Crunching the numbers gives us a conversion efficiency of 45%.

What does all this mean? Given this conversion efficiency, I would already talk about solar electricity competing with natural gas if solar electricity could be produced at $6.68/mmBTU electrical equivalent. How long will it be before solar electricity reaches price parity with fossil fuel thermal energy? Personally, I'm still trying to make sense of what it means when heat is more cheaply produced via electricity than it is burning fuel. The reason that sounds so obscenely absurd is because you may as well take a coal-fired power plant and replace the coal with electrical heating.

The caveat, of course, is that we're looking at Mexico where there is very good solar energy potential. Still, as solar power continues to shave its price year after year, it'll only be a matter of time before colder climates start to catch up.