The Environment

Everyone loves a healthy debate. Post an idea or comment about a current event or issue. Let others post their ideas also. This area is for those who love to explore other points of view.

Moderator: Nicole Marie

Re: The Environment

Postby piqaboo » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:34 am

I'll raise you - aioli instead of ranch, pls.
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Re: The Environment

Postby Haggis@wk » Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:01 am

Save a mountain, build a windmill, freeze in the dark

Thomas Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research (IER), an industry-backed think tank, said the new EPA rule "will bankrupt the coal industry and cause electricity prices to 'necessarily skyrocket,' fulfilling two more promises President Obama made while running for office. The magnitude of this EPA decision on new and renewal permits in Appalachia will cost American jobs and put mom and pop operators out of business."

Pyle was referring to Obama's 2008 statement that his energy and environmental policies would "necessarily skyrocket" consumer costs for energy


Oh good, the only Obama promise that doesn't come with a built in expiration date
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: The Environment

Postby jamiebk » Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:18 am

What a joke...these guys are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Republican party...what else would anyone expect from these "consultants"? http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/issues/ http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/ http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/staff/
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: The Environment

Postby Haggis@wk » Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:49 am

jamiebk wrote:What a joke...these guys are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Republican party...what else would anyone expect from these "consultants"? http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/issues/ http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/ http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/staff/



Wanna bet that your prices won't go up based on the new EPA rules? In a hypocritical sleight of hand, CA has been buying power from coal fired plants in other states why smugly pointing to it’s own low emission standards. :roll:

In a bid to lower emissions would you be willing to pay 50% higher energy bills?

Spin all you want but this is what candidate Obama said in your state:

Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.


This is so unpopular with Congress that Ovbama never tried to refer it. He just ordered his EPA Administrator to impose the rules by fiat, which she has done.

Sheesh, you think he has your best interest at heart?
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: The Environment

Postby piqaboo » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:41 am

I learned last week that 30% of So Cals electricity use is to pump water over the hills and thru the woods from points north and east.
So, save water, and save electricity at the same time.
That's pretty easy.

I have one friend who saved ~ 5 gallons a day AND 5 min of her time.
Instead of running the tap til the water is warm in the am, she wets the washcloth, then microwaves it for 10 sec.
Faster, and she gets the nice warm face wash.
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Re: The Environment

Postby Haggis@wk » Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:12 am

French Riviera sees new case of chikungunya virus.

“French health authorities have asked doctors on the Riviera to be on the alert after a second case was detected in the region this weekend of the mosquito-borne chikungunya virus. Two 12-year girls in the town of Frejus have caught the virus that causes fever, headaches and arthritic-type symptoms that leave victims stooped, officials said Sunday. . . . There is no known vaccine or treatment for chikungunya, which has infected millions of people in Africa and Asia and can cause debilitating pain and, in extreme cases, death.”


If only we had some way of killing all those mosquitoes before they could spread disease – oh wait, we do! It’s called “DDT”.

I wonder how many cases of incurable mosquitoes borne diseases in Europe it will take before DDT starts looking good to the powers that be? I supect the current victims can be described as "...of north Africa ancestry." Wait till those lily white relatives of politicians start getting sick.

Africa? Forget about it, the Western views have been “screw Africa” for centuries.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: The Environment

Postby Haggis@wk » Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:49 pm

That environmentally-friendly reusable grocery bag may be contaminated with lead.

Most significant comment:

There’s always something wrong with everything.” Amen, brother
Last edited by Haggis@wk on Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: The Environment

Postby dai bread » Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:36 pm

Haggis@wk wrote:French Riviera sees new case of chikungunya virus.

Africa? Forget about it, the Western views have been “screw Africa” for centuries.


Africans' views have also been "screw Africa," at least since the various colonies got their independence. Conversation with immigrants from South Africa is alarming. So are some of the articles they write, in particular the ones that refer to the need for razor wire around people's living quarters.

Then there's the on-going saga of Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where one of the few breadbaskets of Africa was turned into an impoverished mess whose reinstatement we sinful and racist Westerners will undoubtedly be expected to pay for when the tyrant eventually dies.

I do feel sorry for grass-roots Africans, though. They are being screwed by everybody, including their own "leaders".
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: The Environment

Postby Shapley » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:51 pm

Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Re: The Environment

Postby Haggis@wk » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:58 am

Here’s something those idiot in Cancun came up with. They haven’t decided on anything yet, mind you. They’re just sort of kickin’ around ideas.

In one paper Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, said the only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing the poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years.

This would mean a drastic change in lifestyles for many people in countries like Britain as everyone will have to buy less ‘carbon intensive’ goods and services such as long haul flights and fuel hungry cars…

This could mean a limit on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture…

Prof Anderson insisted that halting growth in the rich world does not necessarily mean a recession or a worse lifestyle, it just means making adjustments in everyday life such as using public transport and wearing a sweater rather than turning on the heating.


Really? Rationing electricity doesn’t necessarily mean a worse lifestyle? Every year, environmentalists organize an ambitious global warming protest that calls on people to turn their lights off for one hour. Even among eco-nuts, that’s as much as they feel safe in asking people to sacrifice. Good luck with that rationing idea, gang. Besides, assuming this dopey idea were ever attempted — which it never, ever would be — does anyone expect the world’s number one greenhouse-gas emitter to voluntarily retard its roaring economic growth with rolling blackouts for the sake of slowing global warming? That was one of the grim lessons from Copenhagen, as I recall.

Ah well, at least no one’s called for population control. Yet.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: The Environment

Postby Shapley » Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:55 pm

Haggis@wk wrote:Ah well, at least no one’s called for population control. Yet.


You might as well say it is implied. Industrialized nations can't freeze growth and support a growing population without reducing lifestyles. Any increase in population with no resultant change in energy usage means there is less energy per person. Population control is inherent to the plan. They've just had to good sense not to try to bring it up. Yet.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Re: The Environment

Postby analog » Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:58 pm

Good luck with that [electricity] rationing idea, gang...


that's what worries me about 'smart grid', every outlet and appliance in your house will be in communication with a central computer someplace.
I prefer decentralization, perhaps a return to low - tech.. like this guy's steam battery charger.

Image

http://www.otherpower.com/steamengine.shtml

a.
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: The Environment

Postby piqaboo » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:35 pm

oooh! I do like that!
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Re: The Environment

Postby Shapley » Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:30 pm

I read a discussion on steam power for electrical generation a while back. According to the articles I could find, Steam power is considered pretty inefficient for smaller power levels, compared to other means of driving generators. Unless you superheat the steam, which small boilers such as his will not do, you are not going to get enough energy out of the steam to justify the fuel input.

Obviously, this guy is intrigued by the idea of steam power, and doesn't mind the inefficiency, because of his fascination with the novelty aspect, and his desire to get away from fossil fuels altogether (preferring pre-fossilized vegetation to that obtained post-fossilization). Either way, however, he is depriving future generations of fossil fuels, is he not?

There are a number of old steam traction engines around these parts. Many of their owners get together once or twice a year at rallies to show off the equipment, firing up the boilers and cutting hay, sawing wood, or just puttering around. Apparently, the steam engines are high-maintenance, which is why these guys don't use them more often. Of course, the fact that it can take more than an hour to get them warmed up safely and sufficiently before using them to produce work doesn't help their overall utility.

Still, they are kind of neat to see running...
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Re: The Environment

Postby dai bread » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:52 pm

I haven't seen anywhere details of just how big a photovoltaic set-up has to be to run a household's lighting and appliances. Given that most appliances are used only sporadically (even the hot water is switched on and off by its thermostat), it seems that a relatively low-wattage system would do very well so long as the batteries would stand intermittent high drain. Probably you'd need mains power for the stove.

I could ask a supplier, but he'll think I want to buy a system, which I don't. They're simply not economical for me.
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: The Environment

Postby analog » Thu Dec 02, 2010 10:23 pm

Heat is a pretty concentrated form of energy, so any appliances that make or move heat are energy gobblers.

A small fridge might use a half kilowatt while it runs, and a whole kilowatt while it defrosts a few minutes every day.

Heating water is awful - five KW or so, so do that with a gas (or solar) water heater not with solar electricity from 10% efficient photocells.
A stove can gobble a kilowatt per burner so make it gas too.

Central air eats maybe 3KW so keep your electric company connection or get used to summertime with ceiling fans.

A 2kw system with batteries should light a modest house with LED or CCF lamps and keep a small fridge going most nights... but forget about airconditioning.

i'd sure like to invent a roof mounted solar airconditioner. Should be do-able using water and a concentrating collector, something akin to that steam powered unit on OT's submarine... they'd really sell in the sunbelt and S Florida. If one could evaporate fifty gallons of water over the course of a day you'd make around a ton of airconditioning which would really help with electric bill. Sun seems natural for a batch process........


a.
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: The Environment

Postby Shapley » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:39 pm

Frank Lloyd Wright hated air conditioning. He also liked living in the desert. His solution was to install a waterfall and pond in the house, with a chimney above it. They had to be kept out of direct sunlight, I believe. The flow of water through the waterfall cooled the air around it, pulling outside air down the chimney and cooling it as well. The pond ensured that there was enough volume of water to keep it from cooled, since the heat transfer would graduallly warm the water in the water fall. The theory was that the water in the pond was cooled back down by contact with the relatively cool and shaded ground. The house would be designed to aid natural circulation, with the gradually-warming air flowing back out through open windows or vents.

Even though he liked large window-walls, he kept these shaded with large overhanging roofs, as well as having the majority North-facing, I believe.

I'm not sure how effective it was by today's standards, but he claims it kept the house livable in the high heat of midday.

He was also an advocate of Earth-sheltered designs.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Re: The Environment

Postby analog » Fri Dec 03, 2010 3:01 pm

Frank Lloyd Wright hated air conditioning. He also liked living in the desert. His solution was to install a waterfall and pond in the house, with a chimney above it.


That'd work great in a low humidity desert because the water would evaporate as it tumbled down the fall driving nearby air toward the dewpoint, and the moistened air would , as it warmed back to room temperature, rise and exit out the chimney because it's lighter than dry air. [Molecular weight of dry air = 29, water = 18, a mix is somewhere in between, and i guess that's why a falling barometer brings rain...]

Not much help in S Florida summers though where dewpoint runs only a degree below thermometer...

And yes, that guy's steam engine battery charger is impractical, just the kind of toy i'd enjoy. An excuse to burn leaves and tree debris from the yard...
hmmmm.... if one could have that boiler run a steam jet to pull vacuum on a fifty-five gallon drum of water and plumb that to a car radiator mounted in his central air plenum.... naah, leaf raking is in autumn when you dont need air...
oh well, Ms Boo - Red Green would be proud of us. http://www.redgreen.com/


a. :)
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: The Environment

Postby dai bread » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:27 pm

I came across a National Parks Visitor Centre that used evaporation in towers for cooling. If I remember rightly, it was in Death Valley, which has very low humidity of course. It worked beautifully. 109F outside, nice and comfortable inside.
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: The Environment

Postby jamiebk » Fri Dec 03, 2010 8:49 pm

In the southwest where it tends to be warm and dry, people have been using evaporative coolers for years. They are referred to as "Swamp Coolers" and they work quite well in low humidity situations as you point out.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

PreviousNext

Return to The Debate Team

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]

cron