Halp Politics, Politics, Politics... (Not THE abortion thread, but an abortion of a thread nonetheless)

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, yeah. It's largely an exercise in political will, which should be driven by the damage we're doing with non-renewable energy sources (via the Paris accords or Kyoto agreement).

So of course it'll never happen, because Paul Ryan's cows (those being his principal constituents, as they outnumber people in his gerrymandered to all hell "district") don't believe in global climate change.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Hoff Kinkmeister and my little brony
Jehannum said:
Less line loss, and smaller (cheaper) power lines.
Click to expand...

seems at that point we could put like a 48dc grid in peoples homes to run most of their appliances, instead of having every single device use a transformer to knock 120vac down to 5dc. would be huge energy savings if we could get away from the 120vac service. also 2 wires instead of 3.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: my little brony, Jehannum and OOD
plot said:
seems at that point we could put like a 48dc grid in peoples homes to run most of their appliances, instead of having every single device use a transformer to knock 120vac down to 5dc. would be huge energy savings if we could get away from the 120vac service. also 2 wires instead of 3.
Click to expand...
I'm in, it would halve the losses of my solar inverter.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: my little brony
progress
noun
ˈprəʊɡrɛs/
  1. 1.
    forward or onward movement towards a destination.
    "the darkness did not stop my progress"
    synonyms: forward movement, onward movement, progression, advance, advancement,headway, passage;
    going
    "ceaseless rain made further progress impossible"
  2. 2.
    development towards an improved or more advanced condition.
    "we are making progress towards equal rights"
    synonyms: development, advance, advancement, headway, step(s) forward, progression,improvement, betterment, growth;
    breakthrough
    "the progress of medical science"
 
hz9eIA3.jpg
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Hoff Kinkmeister and OOD
plot said:
that's not what i'm hearing on the wind front. it's expensive to build a wind farm because you gotta build a coal plant next to it to make up for those times when its not windy and the areas these things get put in often have poor transmission lines to urban areas that actually need the power. it's being heavily subsidized right now, but when that ends the market will drop off heavily.

conglomerate i work for is a huge manufacturer of wind turbines, i used to sit next to a group of wind engineers and heard this stuff day in and day out. i actually worked on a new nacelle facility a few years back, that place lives and dies by the subsidies though. the other problem is nobody wants those wind turbines in their back yard.

solar is the best bet for most places, just need to perfect those batteries which took a huuuuge leap forward the past few years with that tesla thing.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, no, that's not how electricity works. The grid is all tied together, so it doesn't matter where the coal plant is. However, you bring up a valid point in that when the wind dies, coal plants are the things that can be fired up the quickest.

Also, everything I've read says that wind is already profitable even excluding tax credits.
 
fly said:
Pretty much, no, that's not how electricity works. The grid is all tied together, so it doesn't matter where the coal plant is. However, you bring up a valid point in that when the wind dies, coal plants are the things that can be fired up the quickest.

Also, everything I've read says that wind is already profitable even excluding tax credits.
Click to expand...
You still need the coal capacity sitting idle somewhere is the point. If wind provides 10% of your power then you need coal plants somewhere to cover that. Wind covering that 10% is awesome, but having those extra plants, turbines at existing plants, or whatever else isn't cheap. It helps the problem but it isn't the magic solution people seem to think it is. I also know our british off shore wind plants had significant transmission problems and massive cost overruns to correct the issues. Somewhere to the tune of half a billion.

Let our customers (electric companies) know how profitable it is plz. Their accountants aren't on board with them.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Amstel
plot said:
You still need the coal capacity sitting idle somewhere is the point. If wind provides 10% of your power then you need coal plants somewhere to cover that. Wind covering that 10% is awesome, but having those extra plants, turbines at existing plants, or whatever else isn't cheap. It helps the problem but it isn't the magic solution people seem to think it is. I also know our british off shore wind plants had significant transmission problems and massive cost overruns to correct the issues. Somewhere to the tune of half a billion.

Let our customers (electric companies) know how profitable it is plz. Their accountants aren't on board with them.
Click to expand...
Okay, you're saying what I've already said. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back