- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
The last couple of months I have been thinking about US and world energy use and how to come to a reasonable projected future. As part of that I was driven to consider the reason for energy use, its effect on society and the world, and the effect on the environment.
Recently there was a movie that focused on the enviromental effect of parts of the energy use picture (along the name of "An Inconvenient Truth"). I will admit that I have not seen the movie; however I do not doubt the general premise of the movie.
However, That is just one view of one corner of all the issues involved with energy use in the world.
One concept out there that has fasicnated me for decades is the concept of sustaninable energy use: i.e., the idea that you could live in a house, and work in a job that did not need to import energy from another part of the world.
Why, I wonder is it necessary to write a check each month to the electric utility and the gas utility. Or at least - why do we need to send that check somewhere else. Why not, in towns or cities, just have a local distribution service that was a stand alone operation.
This has taken me recently down the path of investigating why we use such energy in the first place.
Long ago in the "developed" nations - and yet today in much of the "3rd" world nations people live and work based on the limitations of local (and often renewable) energy sources.
Cooking and heating (where needed) is done with wood, dried peat, or some form of dried animal droppings, or from basic solar ovens. Almost all equipment is either animal or man powered. Lighting is often from locally grown plant oils or locally butchered animal fats. It was discovered that wood could be reduced to charcoal which could be used for smelting and working of metals.
However. Modern society as we know it can not exist. These people largly spend most of their day envolved in the basics of survival (hunting, fishing, raising crops, etc). Machines or tools necessary to improve their life cannot really exist in any meaningfull quantity without the use of some other forms of energy.
Wind energy was harnesed to power simple machines or for sailing that allowed people to produce many other items, or process food and water, or transport goods or raw materials to other areas which allowed a great expansion of the standard of living.
Falling Water energy was the next item to be harnesed which allowed more machines to be able to produce more goods for people with only a few people producing them.
The discovery that certain rocks would burn and provide heat (coal and forms of oil stone) provided an easily transportable form of heat energy that could be used for many things. This is what largly powered the industrial revolution, central heating, and most household appliances (the foot pedal powered singer sowing machine was only possible to manufacture using coal).
Mobile machine powered machines (tractors, trucks, steamships, trains, etc) were only possible with the advent of the mining of these compact, highly intensive, and easily transportable forms of energy.
Of couse, much of the modern polution and degradation of the environment (in many ways)was a byproduct from the use of these fuels. Most industries that were not environmentally freindly (mining and chemical mfr) were limited prior to this because they were dependent on animal or human power with some assistance from crude windmills and waterwheels.
The discovery of petroleum and then nuclear energy only accelerated the use of large quantities of energy by people and by factories.
People have also gotten use to these cheap forms of portable energy and many modern societies are composed of people who are energy hogs. It''s cheap and available - so we keep using it for things that we really don''t need to use if for.
The concept of conversion to a "truely sustainable" energy use policy - where we were not using many of the modern transportable energy sources in of by itself is not very realistic - unless you wish to go back to living conditions and a lifestyle typical of the ancient times. An issue that most people do not consider is how much energy and of what forms of energy and pollution are required to manufacture the modern energy producing equipment.
As an example: Solar cells are wonderfull if all you do is buy them and use them. From an energy and pollution of production standpoint - they are extreemly expensive such that just from an energy point solar cells could not produce enough energy to power their manufacture.... or the manufacture of their replacement when they degrade and need replaceing (and they do degrade). From a polution and water resource standpoint they are not good either.
Ethonal production from corn in the US actually now does produce more ethonal than it would take to produce it. However, it is only availabe in large quantities because the tractors and other farm equipment is powered by petroleum, and the ethonal production plant is powered largly by either natural gas or coal (and the environmetalist are horrified by all the coal fired ethonal plants now being built now that natural gas is no longer cheap - there is essentially no envirmental benifit from using coal produced ethonal).
Were ethonal used to power the farm machinery and fuel the ethonal factory - the consumer available ethonal would only be in the range of 10 to 15% of the current production. It would be extreemly expensive as well compared to "current" ethonal prices.
I will concede that other crops would produce a lot more ethonal - but most of those crops do not grow well in most of the US (Hawaii could do very well with its sugar cane production).
I have to be off to another activity today. But I thought I would strat this thread.
The key to consider is how much energy, pollution, and lifestyle impact does every energy or machine technology have in the production and use of that technology.
There is no perfect techonolgy or solution out there: when looked at from what it takes to make or produce the machines or energy source to what happens when it is being used to what happens when it is time to dispose of the worn out equipment or various residues...
Coal is abundent and cheap to mine and transport (especially if you are willing to accept that coal miners will routinely die while mining it) - but....
What are the "but''s" or just issues (pro or con) with each change.
Something I think should really be thought about - without a lot of hype or emotion.
Perry
Recently there was a movie that focused on the enviromental effect of parts of the energy use picture (along the name of "An Inconvenient Truth"). I will admit that I have not seen the movie; however I do not doubt the general premise of the movie.
However, That is just one view of one corner of all the issues involved with energy use in the world.
One concept out there that has fasicnated me for decades is the concept of sustaninable energy use: i.e., the idea that you could live in a house, and work in a job that did not need to import energy from another part of the world.
Why, I wonder is it necessary to write a check each month to the electric utility and the gas utility. Or at least - why do we need to send that check somewhere else. Why not, in towns or cities, just have a local distribution service that was a stand alone operation.
This has taken me recently down the path of investigating why we use such energy in the first place.
Long ago in the "developed" nations - and yet today in much of the "3rd" world nations people live and work based on the limitations of local (and often renewable) energy sources.
Cooking and heating (where needed) is done with wood, dried peat, or some form of dried animal droppings, or from basic solar ovens. Almost all equipment is either animal or man powered. Lighting is often from locally grown plant oils or locally butchered animal fats. It was discovered that wood could be reduced to charcoal which could be used for smelting and working of metals.
However. Modern society as we know it can not exist. These people largly spend most of their day envolved in the basics of survival (hunting, fishing, raising crops, etc). Machines or tools necessary to improve their life cannot really exist in any meaningfull quantity without the use of some other forms of energy.
Wind energy was harnesed to power simple machines or for sailing that allowed people to produce many other items, or process food and water, or transport goods or raw materials to other areas which allowed a great expansion of the standard of living.
Falling Water energy was the next item to be harnesed which allowed more machines to be able to produce more goods for people with only a few people producing them.
The discovery that certain rocks would burn and provide heat (coal and forms of oil stone) provided an easily transportable form of heat energy that could be used for many things. This is what largly powered the industrial revolution, central heating, and most household appliances (the foot pedal powered singer sowing machine was only possible to manufacture using coal).
Mobile machine powered machines (tractors, trucks, steamships, trains, etc) were only possible with the advent of the mining of these compact, highly intensive, and easily transportable forms of energy.
Of couse, much of the modern polution and degradation of the environment (in many ways)was a byproduct from the use of these fuels. Most industries that were not environmentally freindly (mining and chemical mfr) were limited prior to this because they were dependent on animal or human power with some assistance from crude windmills and waterwheels.
The discovery of petroleum and then nuclear energy only accelerated the use of large quantities of energy by people and by factories.
People have also gotten use to these cheap forms of portable energy and many modern societies are composed of people who are energy hogs. It''s cheap and available - so we keep using it for things that we really don''t need to use if for.
The concept of conversion to a "truely sustainable" energy use policy - where we were not using many of the modern transportable energy sources in of by itself is not very realistic - unless you wish to go back to living conditions and a lifestyle typical of the ancient times. An issue that most people do not consider is how much energy and of what forms of energy and pollution are required to manufacture the modern energy producing equipment.
As an example: Solar cells are wonderfull if all you do is buy them and use them. From an energy and pollution of production standpoint - they are extreemly expensive such that just from an energy point solar cells could not produce enough energy to power their manufacture.... or the manufacture of their replacement when they degrade and need replaceing (and they do degrade). From a polution and water resource standpoint they are not good either.
Ethonal production from corn in the US actually now does produce more ethonal than it would take to produce it. However, it is only availabe in large quantities because the tractors and other farm equipment is powered by petroleum, and the ethonal production plant is powered largly by either natural gas or coal (and the environmetalist are horrified by all the coal fired ethonal plants now being built now that natural gas is no longer cheap - there is essentially no envirmental benifit from using coal produced ethonal).
Were ethonal used to power the farm machinery and fuel the ethonal factory - the consumer available ethonal would only be in the range of 10 to 15% of the current production. It would be extreemly expensive as well compared to "current" ethonal prices.
I will concede that other crops would produce a lot more ethonal - but most of those crops do not grow well in most of the US (Hawaii could do very well with its sugar cane production).
I have to be off to another activity today. But I thought I would strat this thread.
The key to consider is how much energy, pollution, and lifestyle impact does every energy or machine technology have in the production and use of that technology.
There is no perfect techonolgy or solution out there: when looked at from what it takes to make or produce the machines or energy source to what happens when it is being used to what happens when it is time to dispose of the worn out equipment or various residues...
Coal is abundent and cheap to mine and transport (especially if you are willing to accept that coal miners will routinely die while mining it) - but....
What are the "but''s" or just issues (pro or con) with each change.
Something I think should really be thought about - without a lot of hype or emotion.
Perry
300x240.png)