Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Energy Independence, Is it Possible?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Energy Independence, Is it Possible? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/20/2007 9:01:09 PM   
erebus


Posts: 169
Joined: 1/15/2004
Status: offline 		A serious question, no?

Yes, it is possible.  The first thing we need to do is to realize that unlimited legal and illegal immigration adds perhaps two million people to the US every year, so unless we stop it, we are facing a moving target, and we'll never catch up.

Did you know that if there were no immigration, we would still be at 1950 population levels of about 150 million?  The population growth has come almost entirely from immigrants, moving here and then popping out four or five or six babies per family.  Isn't that wild? 

Secondly, we have to accept that there is no economically-feasible source of power other than nuclear power.  France currently gets something like 80% of their electricity from nuclear (US-about 20%). 

Conservation can help out considerably as well, and we are working on that (not by mandating that trucks get 45 mpg like the liberals want; pie-in-the-sky). 

Solar, wind and other 'green' sources are unreliable, uneconomical, or both to be feasible.

The US has a 500 year supply of coal, which can be converted to methanol to power cars to help ease the demand for a liquid fuel.  Methanol is convenient, the engineering has been worked out, and it can be made from coal and biomass.  Ethanol is a scam run by Iowan farmers, that's why all the presidential candidates have to sign the ethanol pledge. 

The solution is very achievable.  Long term, hydrogen fusion MAY pan out, but the minor changes outlined here can get us free of our slavery to the Gulf states in 20 years or less.
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/20/2007 9:56:40 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		http://spacesolarpower.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf

THAT'S the future. And if we start today, 50 years down the road it's a reality and we own the Universe.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/20/2007 10:04:24 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		 

Nuclear has never been viable.It`s so unsafe,that no insurance company will insure a plant.

BTW,could we store the nuclear waste in your town?Get back to us on that.....

This is more than un-reliable or "un-economic".(is  un-economic a word?)

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2001/07/45056

A gigantic solar panel at the train station greets visitors to Freiburg. The city also boasts the new Zero Emissions Hotel Victoria, which is the first European hotel to run completely on alternative energy sources. Even Freiburg's premier league soccer stadium is solar powered.
More than 450 environmentally oriented companies and institutions take advantage of the favorable weather, research, networking opportunities and progressive political climate in Freiburg, which makes even Berkeley -- its soul mate in the San Francisco Bay Area -- look comparatively conservative.
The German solar industry has exploded in the last two years. DFS (Deutscher Fachverband Solarenergie), the German Association for Solar Energies, recently reported a 50 percent rise in solar panel orders during 2000.
German solar companies sold 75,000 solar systems in 2000 in addition to 360,000 solar systems installed previously, and photovoltaic installations increased fourfold from 1999.
Solar power means big business in Germany: Solar companies generated revenues of $435 million in 2000. According to DFS, Germany -- with its 54 percent market share -- is by far the European leader in produced solar collectors.
The trade show floors at InterSolar also demonstrate the increasing maturity of the industry. While a few years ago so-called "Ökos" (German shorthand for ecologically minded types) or "Müslies" (Musli eaters) in Birkenstock sandals and "suspiciously long" hair flocked to the conferences.
This time, the Ökos are swept aside by determined-looking business people in blue suits, Palm Pilots in hand, who squeeze into the conference's three halls, already packed to the gills with 240 exhibitors and more than 13,000 visitors in three days.
It was not fear of power outages, high gas prices or tripled power bills, but economic incentives that jump-started the solar revolution in Germany.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics

Although the selling price of modules is still too high to compete with grid electricity in most places, significant financial incentives in Japan and then Germany triggered a huge growth in demand, followed quickly by production. Although module prices rose and plateaued[10], it is expected that costs and prices will fall to 'grid parity' in many places around 2010.



http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/04/largest_solar_p.php

The ribbon was cut on the World's largest continguous solar plant on 27th April 2006 in Germany. Construction on the 40 million euro (US$48 million) photovoltaic installation started August 2005. This plant demonstrates new standards in cost-efficiency for solar power. Using the master-slave inverter concept developed by Shell, the plant delivers the optimized energy output. Also, flexible installation technology--such as the use of either aluminum, wood or steel racks depending on material prices and the foundation on either concrete or piles--optimizes the costs. And if solar is viable in Germany, just imagine the efficiencies possible where the sun really shines!

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/20/2007 11:18:07 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		I served on a nuclear ship in the USN and by neccessity learned quite a bit about the workings and details of nuclear power. It is efficient (ultimately it is a steam power plant and we've got those pretty well figured out) however the waste, fuel rods and primary coolant water, is highly radioactive with isotopes with half lives in the thousands of years and of particularly health affecting sorts, see especially Iodine 129/131 and Caesium 137. Until a waste disposal plan is worked out a major expansion of nuclear power isn't simply unfeasable it is a disaster waiting to happen.

Blaming immigrants for everything including our energy problems is absolutely absurd. We're all immigrants and I don't see many first generation immigrants driving H2's or Escalades much less having huge houses that aren't properly insulated.

Ethanol is a not great solution for a liquid fuel. Efficient production requires high sugar plant stuffs, like corn, that is normally a part of teh human food chain. Shifting to using corn stalks and other agricultural leftovers is much less efficient and, due to not plowing this material under every year, increases the need for fertilizer which is fairly energy intensive to produce. Pursuit of a crop that can be grown in high density on otherwise undesirable land should be pursued.

Solar is not the entire solution but it is a major solution. Panels on every roof, for either hot water or power, would greatly lower fossil fuel consumption. It is rapidly becoming too late for american innovators to get out in front in this industry due to the GOP scum obfuscating the problem and ignoring the rest of the industrialized world's governments incentivizing the growth of the industry in those nations.

Liquefying US coal is not a good fuel solution in the short or long term. First present methods are very energy and fuel ineffecient. Secondly sulphur is a serious contamaninat of much of the US coal supply and simply processing the coal into a liquid form wouldn't remove the sulphur which result in it being burned and released into the air. Sulfur oxides are a major cause of acid rain and we have made rather significant strides in reducing such emissions and now is not the time to reverse course. 

Conservation, including mandating quite achievable MPG standards (45 mpg for trucks if that is what the rest of the world is already achieving) is a necessary step as is the functional banning of so called sport utility vehicles. Simply put SUV's  have no business being in 99% of the driveways they presently occupy. You should not be hauling around kids or groceries in a vehicle built to commercial truck safety and fuel standards. If SUV's are to be sold for non commercial uses then they need to be required to adhere to non commercial vehicle safety and fuel economy rules which at present the vast majority do not.

Wind isn't the whole solution either but it is well established that a wind farm is a steady electricity producer and can be built in a fairly wide range of locations. The cost of the wind turbines has come down dramatically as production has increased and will only continue as more wind farms are proposed and built. Another emergent industry those in the oil industry's pocket have almost let slip away from the US.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/21/2007 7:54:54 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		While I agree with a number of DomKen's points- I have to disagree with some of his statements-

1)  Nuclear efficiency- since nuclear is a Rankine cycle boiler, it suffers from the same efficiency as any other Rankine (whether it's coal fired, natural gas, landfill gas, oil, etc.) plant- i.e. around 37-40% max- with a lot of waste heat.  Nuclear installations on ships are more efficient because they can't vent that much waste heat.  Concentrated solar power (CSP) has the same problem, but since it uses sunlight as fuel, it has some advantages.  Erebus's comment about nuclear is akin to accepting Christianity as the only true religion.  Nuclear only makes sense near high population densities, since for economic reasons, plants have to be large- and we still haven't got a grid that does long haul power transfer well.  Nuclear does NOT lend itself well to distributed power.

2)  Many of the larger new homes are actually well insulated- a new house today is often more energy efficient than a house half its size from the 1950s, i.e. uses less energy.  On the other hand- giant size plasma TVs which gobble several hundred watts aren't exactly helping.

3)  Ethanol is a compromise liquid fuel- and as such it's not perfect, but it's not terrible either.  Agree that liquid fuels from coals are a nightmare- they generate lots of CO2 as well.  Ethanol has an advantage in that it's pretty environmentally benign- methanol is much toxic to wildlife and the aquifer.  Gasoline is worse still, but it's been grandfathered.  While ethanol from corn is a terrible idea, corn has been developed over centuries as a human food, not as an energy source.  There are grasses (weeds) being developed that grow quickly, need no fertilizer, and don't deplenish the soil.  Unfortunately we don't have a good process to convert cellulose to alcohol- although termites do.  We're only spending $150M a year on research in this area- but crack this problem- and we're set.  Bear in mind that the environmental aspects are easy- as long as the carbon source comes from the atmosphere, not the ground, it's a virtuous cycle, and there's much less to worry about.  (Soot, etc can still be a problem, but the overall theory is that the balance of CO2 in the atmosphere long terms will remain constant.)  Brazil has already shown that it's not that hard to convert an existing automotive fleet to ethanol.

Agree that solar is a big part of the solution- and Nanosolar shifting into production will certainly help-and give the US a chance to regain either the lead, or gain a major chunk of the market.  Regulation and incentives that would help build this industry quickly would be a great idea- but great ideas are extinct in Washington these days.

Wind at best can supply 20% of energy needs (maybe more depending on if it's on the coast or not) based on other country's experience- but it's a nice form of energy to use.  Again, better long haul power transmission and storage would help here.  Agree that the debacle of the wind industry shows terrible leadership out of Washington.

Sam

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/21/2007 8:37:10 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		I think the only hurdle in energy independence for America is political will. Imagine a leadership not controlled by money.

The technologies are well tested and will work. The cost for implementation could be offset by new employment and construction. There would be a massive influx of tax revenue that would allow tax incentives to make purchase and installation by families affordable.

It would be a huge boost in our economy with reduced energy costs and new industries. In addition to the above…. imagine being able to tell Venezuela and Opec what to do with their oil. Tell Israel and Palestine to go to hell if they can’t resolve their differences but we will not give either another penny. 
Butch

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 11:59:27 AM   
DollysSissyGirl


Posts: 27
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: offline 		First and foremost I think we all must come to terms that there is no absolute solution to energy independence. We live in a capitalist society driven by money, success and ultimately greed. We must come to grips and realize that we can become more energy independent and the way to introduce those ideas to society is to first prove to the corporations that we make the technology that they also can make a considerable profit on. We cannot compare our great country to any other, one size hardly fits all. It would be best to take the best of breed ideas from various regions of the world and work out a model that is flexible enough to be morphed into our needs well into the future. More tax breaks to the Fortune 500 would instil reinvestment and revision of NAFTA and our most favored nation trading staus with China would add considerable funds to offset taxation even if only moderately changed. Nothing can get done in this country without somene getting shown the money. After all we were built on capitalist ideals for good or bad it has made us the most prosperous country in history. If we continue to wait and do nothing, we surely will all experience the same sentiment of the Romans when Rome fell.

Regards,

sissy

_____________________________

m i s t r e s s d o l l y . c o m


(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 12:06:30 PM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		Without immigrants the U.S. population will be elderly shortly, not enough people to pay into social security, not enough people for health care which the elderly require a disproportionate amount of.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to DollysSissyGirl)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 12:53:24 PM   
Leonardo


Posts: 113
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erebus


Did you know that if there were no immigration, we would still be at 1950 population levels of about 150 million?  The population growth has come almost entirely from immigrants, moving here and then popping out four or five or six babies per family.  Isn't that wild? 


Solar, wind and other 'green' sources are unreliable, uneconomical, or both to be feasible.




Actually, without immigration, the American Indians would still be the population here. So, in essence, you are almost entirely right there.

Solar and wind energy are reliable enough to provide alternative green energy for a variety of uses, though, again correct, not all uses, but then again, we currently do not depend strictly on one single source of energy.

Corn is being promoted by the corn associations for fuel because it will boost corn prices, which brings about the excuses of boosting other prices, such as milk, beef, etc., however, as stated herein by some others, it is not necessarily the best source of ethanol.

The fact that we do not have technology yet to yield any substantial amount of ethanol from sources other than corn or sugar cane is not really a fact at all, but rather a fallacy. GA Gov. Sonny Perdue recently inaugurated the first ever of its kind, major ethanol manufacturing plant in Soperton, GA, whereby the plant shall be capable of producing millions of gallons of ethanol annually from pine tree farming.

Moreover, there are plenty of better sources for ethanol production than corn.... sugar beets (I only know of 1 person, empirically, who eats that stuff... bride... and she could do without them), potatoes, and of course, with the advent of technology being able to make susbstantial amounts of ethanol from trees, it should be reasonably surmised that a more than plentiful resource could be had by finding a use for the "plant that ate the South" (Southern Living)... Kudzu.

According to current price indexes, bio-fuels usage for transportation would be the equivalent today at approx. $19 per barrel of oil (National Ethanol Coalition), not to mention the hidden costs of military presence in and around the oil-producing countries that it would save us.

Yes, currently, Brazil, a 3rd world country, has found where it has been able to efficiently take advantage of ethanol fuels. When I bought my 2000 Ford Ranger in 1999, I opted for the smaller, 3.0L V-6 rather than the more powerful 4.0 because the 3.) was a flex-fuel engine, allowing me to use E-85 if I wished and could find it. And now, I pay on average $.30 less per gallon than gasoline. Additionally, there are folks in this area who have converted their diesel vehicles to using 100% vegetable oil which they get from restaurants, filter, and use in their vehicles.

Conservation, though not the complete answer, also plays an important part in energy usage. For example, a housing project in Canada has recently been built whereby the total annual energy costs for daily living for a family of 4 is figured out to be approximately $37... that is per year, not per month! Likewise, again, using my truck for example, yes, it is a little truck and it serves its purpose for us, and with my driving habits, I average 28 mpg in my truck and bride averages 37-40 mpg in her little 1998 Ford Escort Stationwagon (which we haven't replaced because we can't find any decent, comparable vehicle to it with same or better mileage).

Total energy independence? Semantically speaking... impossible, since we are dependent upon energy for life. However, alternative, renewable, green energy sources are the only options for survival for "The Human Prospect" (Robert L. Heilbroner).

As for the illegal immigrants, "The United States has always been plagued by illegal immigration... ask the Indians." (Robert Frost).

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 2:20:35 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonardo

As for the illegal immigrants, "The United States has always been plagued by illegal immigration... ask the Indians." (Robert Frost).


Remember my friend the American Indians were also immigrants and had no more right to American soil than Europeans. Not just some but most of early America was total wilderness not occupied by any Indian tribe.

Butch

(in reply to Leonardo)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 2:23:16 PM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erebus

A serious question, no?

Yes, it is possible.  The first thing we need to do is to realize that unlimited legal and illegal immigration adds perhaps two million people to the US every year, so unless we stop it, we are facing a moving target, and we'll never catch up.

Did you know that if there were no immigration, we would still be at 1950 population levels of about 150 million?  The population growth has come almost entirely from immigrants, moving here and then popping out four or five or six babies per family.  Isn't that wild? 

Secondly, we have to accept that there is no economically-feasible source of power other than nuclear power.  France currently gets something like 80% of their electricity from nuclear (US-about 20%). 

Conservation can help out considerably as well, and we are working on that (not by mandating that trucks get 45 mpg like the liberals want; pie-in-the-sky). 

Solar, wind and other 'green' sources are unreliable, uneconomical, or both to be feasible.

The US has a 500 year supply of coal, which can be converted to methanol to power cars to help ease the demand for a liquid fuel.  Methanol is convenient, the engineering has been worked out, and it can be made from coal and biomass.  Ethanol is a scam run by Iowan farmers, that's why all the presidential candidates have to sign the ethanol pledge. 

The solution is very achievable.  Long term, hydrogen fusion MAY pan out, but the minor changes outlined here can get us free of our slavery to the Gulf states in 20 years or less.



Plugging your head in the sand won't keep it from raining.

I'd suggest that your suggestion in regards to immigration is on par with Hitler's plans for the Jews.

Somehow, Europe has managed to achieve 45 mpg vehicles; why do we need to be giving car manufacturers a break?  It won't be the immigrants buying brand new fuel efficiant SUVs, will it?

You offer absolutely no facts, statistics, or figures on how coal is the magic want.  "500 years worth of coal?"  Do you even have a concept of how many trillions of tons of coal that would require?  Did they find a way to turn sand, salt water, and carbon dioxide into coal somehow?

At least the responses to this thread are thoughtful and thought provoking.

Stephan


_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 3:21:49 PM   
bipolarber


Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline 		And there are other possibilities that have not yet been discussed. Emerging tech that may make many of these choices, (like ethenol) obsolete.

Currently, there's a good bit of work on microwave energy being used to break down waste materials into petroleum-like materials. (Popular Science, November)

Fusion would be much easier to control if we fueled it using Helium 3, rather than the gasses we currently are required to use. Unfortunately, H3 doesn't really exist on Earth, the nearest source of it is our own moon. (It's been said that if the moon were made of gold, you still wouldn't be able to bring enough back to make the trip profitable... but, a tank of H3 could power the east coast for a month. THAT would be worth the trip.)

Solar is only unreliable because of the atmosphere. If you place your solar arrays in orbit, and beam the energy back to Earth in the form of microwaves, it becames as reliable as the sun rise itself.

Tidal energy is also reliable, as are temperature differentials in the oceans. Wave energy is also promising.

Ionized hydrogen, burning to create the aforementioned steam turbine energy, is also something that's being worked on. (Hydrogen has the advantage of being the second most plentiful element in the universe... the first being stupidity. LOL)

At the turn of the last century, Jules Verne wrote a book about what life might be like in Paris in the year 2000. He hit the mark in several places, accurately predicting things like motorcars, and telephones... but when it came to predicting air travel, the best he could come up with was huge airships. (Heavier than air flight at the time of his writing was thought to be a physical impossibility) Yet, today, our skies are filled with aircraft, and ballons and blimps are used for advetising and hobby flights.

The future will be ruled by advances we can't really guess at. The world has changed it's energy sources several times before: fire gave way to steam, steam gave way to electricity, and now we're trying to figure out what else can create electricity on a bulk scale that will last for the duration of our civilization... To me, it's just a matter of finding the right way to tap into the one that's been the Earth's primary power source for 3 billion years already: the sun.

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 4:17:51 PM   
FangsNfeet


Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline 		Use Solar, Wind, or Water, someone will find a way to market and sell energy to where you can't get it for free. Big business never wants anyone to be independant.
Politicians will be paid and laws will be passed.

Prediction:

The care needed for Solar pannels and Wind/Water wheels will become a dangerous task. So dangerous that the avearge person will not be allowed to have them at there home. After that, companies will be the ones who will either collect or install and mantain your source for energy.

One way or another, you will always be billed for power. 

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 4:54:58 PM   
bipolarber


Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline 		Tell that to the 350,000 Americans currently living "off grid."

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:05:57 PM   
awmslave


Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline 		The ideas are good but unless US totally reforms the government these ideas can not be introduced. Corporations and stock market make profits out of economic growth and it is sacred and guiding principle of current and future administrations. Zero population growth and energy independence do not fit into this picture. Look how  US Congress sabotages every effort to close the southern border to illegal crossing. Everything is set up for short-term profit. This system will eventually collapse under its own weight but it may take decades. Nothing significant and fundamentally reformist will happen before the real trouble arrives. Presidential candidates (Ron Paul being rare exception) do not even acnowledge that there is something wrong in fundamentals. It is good to know the next president (Mrs. Clinton) cares about children though.

(in reply to bipolarber)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:23:41 PM   
FangsNfeet


Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Tell that to the 350,000 Americans currently living "off grid."


350,000 is just a dime in the bucket compared to the majority.

Trust me, energy companies forsee many more going to independent energy. Rather than going out of buisiness, they're going to find a way to profit off transition. Remember, Tabacco companies have big investments in Life/Health Insurance. They also have a role in the production of products/programs that break tabacco addiction. Just like Tabacco, Energy companies will make a way to earn profit as the Majority makes the effort to live "off grid."

It's just a matter of time. That's my prediction and I'm sticking to it.

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

(in reply to bipolarber)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:30:28 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Realistically most people are not going to go through the hassle required to truly get off the grid. More will than now do as it becomes easier and cheaper but I strongly doubt it will ever be any thing like 10% of households. However encouraging solar on every rooftop will reduce the amount of centrally generated power consumed even if most homes still net consume power from the grid.

One important regulatory changestill needs to be made though. It needs to be illegal for towns, condo associations etc. to forbid rooftop solar panels. Otherwise plenty of comunities will do so as they become more common.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:32:24 PM   
ncsubcharlotte


Posts: 4
Joined: 8/28/2005
Status: offline 		As someone that works directly in design & sales of solar energy, I know for a fact that many people are looking into other options. Many people are trying to transition to off-grid living. Many more would, but simply cannot afford the big upfront cost, even though the payback could be huge! The main obstacle we face is simply education. People are not educated enough when it comes to renewable energy.

(in reply to erebus)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:37:41 PM   
luckydog1


Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline 		Fangs, the largest producer of Solar Panels currently is BP (British Petroleum).  Of course all of this stuff will have to be paid for and maintained, and of course energy companies will be involved, there is no surprise or conspiracy there.  Of course Corporatons will be the ones making the Solar Panels, wave generators, ect.

Most people living off the grid use plenty of Oil based products and energy, and they buy it retail/small amounts so the markup is higher.  Plus they use a lot of oil hualing things out to thier homesteads.  Very few Americans are actually living "off the grid".   Despite not having a power line to thier home, the vast majority are very dependant on the "grid" ie rest of society.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Energy Independence, Is it Possible? - 12/22/2007 9:49:35 PM   
subfever


Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet

quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Tell that to the 350,000 Americans currently living "off grid."


350,000 is just a dime in the bucket compared to the majority.

Trust me, energy companies forsee many more going to independent energy. Rather than going out of buisiness, they're going to find a way to profit off transition. Remember, Tabacco companies have big investments in Life/Health Insurance. They also have a role in the production of products/programs that break tabacco addiction. Just like Tabacco, Energy companies will make a way to earn profit as the Majority makes the effort to live "off grid."

It's just a matter of time. That's my prediction and I'm sticking to it.


I've no doubt that mega corporations will position themselves to reap the lion's share of profits from whatever the replacement energy source happens to be at the time.

I wouldn't be surprised if a super-efficient energy source/technology already exists, but is being kept under the wraps until Big Energy bleeds the last billion in profits from the existing fossil fuel sources.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Energy Independence, Is it Possible? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.203