Hydrogen loves to fly. It's light as Heaven and radiant beyond belief.
Carbon is Earth's grand art medium. It's a well-grounded expression of creation.
They belong together. They're a match made in Heaven.
They can mate in the figure 8s of infinite energy. In their union is born Harbon -- a temporary element of fusion that retains the properties of both parents, yet radiates powerful energy, which can be tapped in home generators.
We can let those sleeping dinosaurs rest in peace.
Those wars are fought in order to preserve the lifestyle Americans are used to. God forbid production decreases Americans will go batshit and start eating each other, I.E New Orleans post Katrina
lol our sientific human capitol is fading in the us - most phd level scientist in our schools are foriegn boen and -often return to thier country of origin - as far as labor it should be measured vs labor - we dont have a shortage of it here - we just dont have a massive oversupply - the monetary cost of labor is like 70$ a month in china and $2000-5000 here so its cheaper but actual resource cost is higher incuding labor inputs - so money just measures supply not effiecieny
They are not compensating when they come take your home. I have my house and vacant 5 acres. I have no debt but I have all my $ in real estate and the plan is no more home ownership or cars.
I dont get it. If it's so easy, why dont people change? Why must politicians be so ignorant? I cannot understand why we humans are so stupid and selfish... It's making me sick -.-
@ScrapySweet Despite a century of fawning adulation solar and wind are still not even sustainable(capable of meeting the needs of today without compromising the needs of the future).
A world-spanning energy grid is just another idiotic bandaid to cover for the failings of non-hydro "renewables". It is very fragile(e.g. to geomagnetic storms), very expensive(transmission is a huge part of electricity cost; why aren't coal plants at the mine mouth?) and very politically dangerous.
@gulbirk Sure, it costs more if the accounting system is based on promissory notes. However, when physical and ecological costs are taken into account through a universal medium upon which all processes and systems depend, such as Energy, the relative costs and sustainability make recurrent sources of Energy (e.g., the various forms of solar and geothermal) much more attractive than finite materials which are more useful as raw materials for manufacturing.
Indeed ignorance! In 1982 Sweden decided to replace its 12 nuclear reactors with renewable energy sources by 2012 . Today still 8 reactors are in operation, a few thousands windmills deliver ca 2% of the total need, while the rest is bought from coal powered plants in Denmark. Thank you "environmentalists" - learn about entropy instead and wake up! (you can do that in my channel on YouTube).
@germain505 With 1 Million-volt DC lines buried underground, it could be as low as 10%. That's hardly huge, considering the result could still be on the order of 100 times as much energy for everyone as the amount of work they could perform through their labor. Energy is actually abundant, not scarce at all, we simply need to develop the WILL to implement well-known and understood methods of harnessing the various forms of solar energy and geothermal. The price system is a major hindrance here.
@germain505 You can make the energy losses arbitrarily low; it is just a question of thicker wires and higher voltages.
What you can't do is do it at a price anyone is willing to pay; or without recreating the disgusting geopolitics that exist with oil, were you install friendly dictators in "problem countries" along the major lines and equatorial solar farms; or protect yourself from geomagnetic storms that darken half the globe; or have political autonomy.
@Boris82much Listen you stupid piece of shit. Planes kill more birds than wind turbines. There are over 400 Bird Strikes a year. A YEAR! With planes and helicopters. Get a fucking life
I know it's all about greed and power. But one other thing wind turbines cost billions and are you willing to pay for that out of your taxes? I believe in renewable energy but it won't be free people. The energy companies will spend billions on renewable energy and we will have to pay for some of it's development edf energy has alreadly informed me my bill will go up cos of investment into wind turbines/renewable energy projects.
@EliteDoomer we cant there with money - all monetary market systems require scarcity and poverty - research the resource based economy -a good start would be zeitgeist addendum -zeitgeist moving forward -zeitnews - anything about the resource based economy or the venus project - abundance for all and peace
@MrIzzyDizzy Technocracy, Incorporated, is an even better source, I would contend. See any essay by M. King Hubbert, Howard Scott, Ron Miller, and the like. Jacques Fresco, of the Venus Project, has several good essays as well, and is a former member of Technocracy, INC.
@MrIzzyDizzy Resources are always scarce and will always need to be allocated sensibly. If we had 100 times more energy, we would just find more uses for energy and it would be seemingly just as scarce again.
You can't get there with money because prices make it obvious that you are squandering resources doing something that makes no damn sense; everyone can see that the emperor is naked despite all the glossy .PDFs and all the smoke you're trying to blow up people's arse.
@soylentgreenb confusing response - not sure you understand money makets - and how they waste resources and how structural monetary cost and requirements for profit actualy waste and limit resource availbility - we can make 100s to 1000s of time more food with less resources - while this may not be infinite - by the time the population is 700 billion to 7 trillion( hopefully never) if ever we will probably be able to make anything from almost anything at the molecular level with nano technology
@MrIzzyDizzy No, you cannot make 100 to 1000 times more food with less resources; particularly not food people actually want to eat at reasonable environmental cost. Macroscopic plants are getting pretty close to the limits set by biology and single celled algae and cyanobacteria are frought with all sorts of problems(palatability being the least of them; it takes a lot of energy, a lot of capital and a hermetically sealed system to prevent contamination by competing algae).
@MrIzzyDizzy Zeitgeist nutters live in the same utopian world that socialists, anarcho-capitalists and other utopian nutters live in; one that exists only in their own mind and doesn't have to deal with all the problems and limitations that exist in the real world.
@soylentgreenb basic example of market waste ,is it obviosly waste resource to ship raw materials from the us to china (it takes more fuel ship and labor) and to assemble them using more labor there( they arent as efficient as our factories) and then ship the finished products - 4000-7000 or more miles to the u.s. (again fuel ships and labor wasted) -yet its cost effiecent -so clearly markets dont represent actual resource cost only money cost - thats 1 reason why you cant get there with money
@MrIzzyDizzy No, that's an example of idealists(namely you) wanting to minimize the use of one resources(energy) at a much greater cost of another(human capital).
Container-ships are extraordinarily efficient.
All labour is not equal. It is not a fungible good. Education level is generally much higher in the US; it makes no sense to waste it on repetitive mechanical labour.
Where you get into trouble with markets is externalities and fraud; and that's why we have regulation.
We need to tackle the reason free energy is suppressed and thwarted. It's out there and the planet could have been clean 50 years ago. I just found this vid because it has the same title as the one I just made! There is No Energy Crisis Part 1-3
Obama's Economic Advisory Council headed by General Electric Chairman Jeffrey Immelt? Was it GE that designed the fucked up nuclear reactors in Fukushima - you know the ones where they didn't bother disposing of the used fuel rods and just chucked 40 years worth on the roof- that blew up and spewed MOX fuel into the atmosphere that has now circled the Earth many times and has every human breathing 5 to 10 radioactive hot particles per day - probably giving everyone cancer in the next 10 years?
@ThorkilKowalski WRONG = when the plant exloded - 40 years of spent M<OX fuel rods were on the roof went sky high and got into the jetstream - circulating the world.
I didn't say that fission product isotopes ALSO existed in the atmosphere. I said that they were the ONLY occurring isotopes which resulted from Fukushima. If there was Uranium or Plutonium in the atmosphere, we would be able to measure it. And futhermore, Uranium and Plutonium cannot be airborne.
@ThorkilKowalski Point 3) is essentially what arnie gundersen said. Is he the only one spouting this idea of hot particles? I sure hope he is and its a crackpot idea - but seems plausible.
I just read some of his statements on the Fukushima accident. To me, it seems like a crackpot idea and, as I said, measurements from Russia (by me) and from the US (link: cemp[dot]dri[dot]edu/cemp/japan_response[dot]html) show only the following radioactive isotopes:iodine-131,cesium-134 and 137, xenon-133, and tellurium-132. If there would have been any uranium or plutonium, it would have been discovered in some of these measurements.
Wrong. I have actually measured the radioactive particles released from this nuclear power plant accident in a class in experimental nuclear engineering. The radioactive isotopes found in a station in Russia were the following: 131,132I, 132Te,134Cs,137Cs. These are all fission products, not fuel particles! Don't believe me? read this:
400 feet underground and is only a thin sliver of coal. Finally, nuclear energy is not a fossil fuel- i think that you need to educate yourself before making a comment.
@ThorkilKowalski the ipcc and the british geological survey agree that we willdefinitely run out of fossil fuels soon. there is an estimated 60trillion cu ft of gas left, which at CURRENT consumption will last for 50years, but consumption will almost definitely increase. an estimated 800 million barrels of oil remaining, which will last untill 2055, and although there is enough coal to last for 1000 years, it is not economically viable to extract it as a large proportion of this coal lies over
I am looking at the BP Statistical Review of World Energy from June 2011 right now. (the most respected source on these issues) The numbers are:
6608.9 trillion cubic feet (that is about 100 times more than you stated) and that gives an R/P ratio of 58.6 years.
-
The funny thing is that I also have the numbers for 1990 - there the reserves were 4441,8 tr. cu feet. So the known reserves have increased 49% in 20 years. What makes you think we are not going to find more?
Wong. The fossil fuels will not deplete over the next century. There is plenty of oil, coal, gas and nuclear. Educate yourself before making a video about it, damnit!
@ThorkilKowalski wrong, you educate your self... nuclear isent a natural recourse and yes oil is running out ans yes gas is running out. your to naive to notice
I have obviously educated myself more than thou. People have been saying that we would soon run out of oil for more than 100 years and they have been proven wrong again and again. If you actually start studying these things seriously instead of watching YouTube videos about it, you will be amazed how obvious it is: You will not see the end of affordable oil and neither will your children (unless governments ban drilling). I can guarantee you that.
@ThorkilKowalski clearly then you have not because 100 years before it was 1911 where oil had started finally booming. then, the word "global warming" had not existed. back then the lack of oil was not even talked of because no person except the richest people even used cars. and you are wrong, oil is depleting. oil is created by fossils trapped in the ground and by pressure. it takes millions of years to create it and in a couple of decades we have greatly depleted it.
@ThorkilKowalski no matter what you say, it is known and fact that oil and natural gases are being depleted. in 50 to 60 years it will be so depleted that only the most wealthiest on nations will be able to acquire it. so yes our children may still have it, but it will cost much more than 3 dollars/gallon higher than 10 probably. while the rest of the world suffers with no electricity to power the growing population of earth. even in america parts will have no electricity. you are being naive
@ThorkilKowalski wow.... really? again you are taking facts from more than a hundred years ago! in 1866, the extraction of coal was the problem because they didnt have the technology to take it out. today, we do. you just got proved wrong with your own proof...
You are totally right for the first time in this debate. When technology improves, we can extract more. So what would your response be if I told you that the global average extraction rate of oil fields is 35 % and that the available reserves are based on this number. Please do the math...
@ThorkilKowalski what you are not understanding is that by using MATH, scientist and geologist alike are able to find out, (even if extraction rates are 35% even though you havent given me any proof they are) how much oil and gases there are left in the extraction site. they know how much will be left.
No. The R/P ratio is based on a low extraction rate and a higher extraction rate increases the ratio.
-
A reserve is defined as that which has already been found and is economically extractable with current technologies. So new technology and new explorations increase the reserves. But this costs money so usually the R/P ratio is around 40 years and it has been so for a hundred years. No crisis seems to be imminent.
@ThorkilKowalski I agree. However, fuel prices will likely rise in the very near future due to increased living standards throughout the world. The auto industry will continue to improve combustion engine efficiencies beyond current standards, increases in the mileage range of electric vehicles, and efficient production of biofuels at larger scales will very likely keep oil prices at least within the near future at affordable rates.
Try reading the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2011. You will see that the reserves rise faster than the production and consumption of oil. I don't think that is about to change. The rising oil prices are partly due to money printing.
@ThorkilKowalski It is a very thorough report. As I suspected, China's rapid industrialization and growing infrastructure is partly contributing to increasing demands for crude oil.
I am glad you looked at the report. Don't you find it interesting and surprising that the oil reserves are growing faster than production and consumption? Is that the general story you hear in mainstream medias? I found it encouraging and surprising.
@ThorkilKowalski Reserves rise fast because oil is expensive and reserves is always about the amount of oil you can extract at some price. The problem has never been a shortage of fossil fuels.
Geothermal. Volcanic place that’s fairly stable, which has hot bowser and a lake near by. Put a large tank filled with water into the super heate water . Connect a pipe from the tank to a generator and then lead the pipe to a massive radiator in the cold lake. When pressure builds the generator turns and walla you got an underground renewable steam generator.
We should start thinking only in clean energy, although the transition from non-renewable to renewable will be difficult.....................it's not impossible. We are the new generation lets start forgetting fossil fuels
NEVER!!!! renewable energy yes, interconnection NO!!! interconection is potentially unsafe and only makes us vulnerable on a larger scale to a number of exegenous factors. Energy security is on of the factors that must be taken into consideration!
While most people will think like this, there will be always wars. Wars for resources hidden with any other reasons. Nuclear power plants are actually quite green, it's only people's greed and ambition that makes them dangerous. Both Japanese Fukushima and Chernobyl are good examples, those disaster could be avoided. There are countries where it's extremely difficult to produce renewable energy and there are those that have A LOT of potential. But this won't be used... ever.
@bogusnachos How much mining is required to yield 1 ton of thorium? Just wondering ...What s the half life of thorium? How much environmental cost is that? And in ballpark figures, how many millions of dollars does it cost us? And WE would profit, right? NOT the corporation who owns the spigot? That requires a paradigm shift, too.
@chubbsuperfly In the lemhi pass in Idaho there are veins close to the surface which contain .4 to .6 percent thorium. So perhaps 400 tons of earth moved for one ton of thorium. That's is the energy equivalent to 3 million tons of coal. I think to 400 tons is better. Thorium 232 half life is about 12 billion years, meaning it is only slightly radioactive. After being run through the reactor, the radioactivity lasts about 300 years.
@chubbsuperfly Thorium is almost worthless, $30,000 for a ton would give us a Gigawatt Year of electricity about $800,000,000 worth at ten cents a kwh. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors would be much simpler a cheaper than current light water reactors and would produce less then 1/1000 the waste. Estimate for construction run around $2 a watt capacity - so 2 billion for a gigawatt reactor (the can be scaled down to 4 megawatts and up to - multiple gigawats. 3 cents kwh.
@chubbsuperfly Thorium reactors are just talk now in the US (china, india,france and russia are working on them). We built and operated such a reactor in the 60s and 70s at Oak Ridge National Labratories. The only problem with it was it didn't make plutonium - needed for weapons. With the cheap energy from thorium, we can synthesize the fuels we need from air and water - see "Green Freedom" lanl. Thorium could make fossil fuels obsolete.
@chubbsuperfly I would hope this would be used to benifit the world. Thorium is everywhere - no nation or group of nations could possibly form a cartel. The thorium reactor doesn't require water, so it could be placed anywhere and its compact. I have no idea how the new industry would be set up.
Pass!!!!!!! Renewable energy is key, however until we possess the resources to run off nothing but renewable energy we must continue to use what we have. To lower the cost of that measure we need to use our own resources and stop depending on other countries to supply us will that which we need.
What about Nuclear? A liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor eliminate or greatly reduces ALL of the problems with current nuclear plants (which are the best form of energy we have today). Wind and Solar are expensive, unreliable and use a huge amount of land and materials Thorium can provide the cleanest energy for the entire world for millions of years (even at American consumption rate).
@bogusnachos How much mining is required to yield 1 ton of thorium? Just wondering how many acres of slag, how many thousands of gallons of diesel to power the shovels and earth movers, and trains and trucks that transport the ore, how much energy is needed to refine the ore, then transport it to the reactor, which requires how much concrete and steel, water and wire, and the construction site, etc. to finally come online?
In order to explore the various alternatives to solve the energy crisis situation, Greenwich University is holding an International Conference on Energy Crisis Management. For more details and updates, plz visit Greenwich University's homepage
No alternative energy is capable of sustaining a growing society unless you decrease demand. Decreasing demand will be the goal of the NWO not finding alternative energy sources. To lower demand they will regulate and diminish commerical and industrial growth, lower quality of life standards, decrease populations, regulate residential usage with smart meters, taxes, blackouts, decrease suburban areas. This is the easiest and surest route to energy sustainability for atheists and enviros
@JesusNonEnviromental If the current population growth rate stays the same, then in the year 4022 there will be 13,000 people for every square foot of land on this planet. At some point we will have population control, the only question is what type.
@bogusnachos Lets worry about tomorrow and take one day at a time. Do you actually plan your day according to what the population will be in 2,000 yrs Today, insanity would be some sign of intelligence
@JesusNonEnviromental Sorry you missed my point that geometric growth cannot be sustained. I used 2011 years from now for a reason - that Jesus is still important today as he was 2000 years ago just as the decisions we make on population will be important 2000 years from now. If we know anything from history, it is that god does not provide, he allows massive amounts of death and suffering.
@bogusnachos If the current rate of change in birth rates and death rates stay the same, in year 4022 humanity would have voluntarily gone extinct by refusing to have babies.
@soylentgreenb True. The birth rate has been declining rapidly over the past 30 years is every country in the world. There are virtually no countries with a GDP per capita of $7000 or more with a birth rate of over 2.5 children per woman.
Men are always afraid and fearful and nothing is more dangerous. Men do not believe in a loving and sovereign God who provides for his creation, but believes the world is a struggle for survival and population growth has become their greatest fear. Men have stopped promoting freedom and prosperity because they believe these are the catalysts for population growth so they will begin to regulate and control both. They will have you believe that death is benefiscial and provides sustainabiltiy
@JesusNonEnviromental What evidence do you have that God "provides". God allow pandemic, natural disasters, famine. I have never hear of a reliable case of food miraculously appearing. If you understand geometric growth, then you know that at our growth rate, in a few thousand years the entire surface of the earth would be hundreds of feet deep in people. Of course there will be a massive die off before that happens. God does not provide, man does.
Renewable energy is the way of the future, and has huge business potential. We are creating leaders in the field of green energy every day. If you have the spirit and mindset to get out in the world and educate people about renewable energy, you have unlimited potential in this field.
Linking the world's electrical grid? what a dumb idea.
More than half of the electricity is lost in transmission lines in less than a thousand miles of wiring. How much will be lost in transmission lines that go on for thousands of miles across continents? You have to build twice as many power plants just to make up for all that loss, requiring twice as much energy. And the cost of infrastructure will be enormous.
Scientists are working on a new method of generating energy by using a sub dermal neurophone to place a quantum harmonizer into a photon resonation chamber. Of course there is always a risk of causing a parabolic destabilization of the fission singularity.
I realy dont beleive that every car, truck, tracktor, airplane, ship can be run on clean electricity.
I am 25 and i beleive that in my life time when oil runs out there could be a world wide famine. Food is getting more and more expensive due to the ever increasing cost of oil.
@english0 All vehicles can use clean electricity to power them, we already have many examples of cars, trucks, airplane's all running from clean green electricity sources.
@kaieteurdevon I think you have mistaken me for an idiot. Of cause i am aware of this. The point i am trying to make is that it would not be possible for EVERY vehicle to run on green energy. The world is over crowded and it is not possible to meet everyone's energy demands from green sources alone, even if the 3rd world could afford them.
@english0 You said ”I realy dont beleive that every car can be run on clean electricity.”
You are mistaken. There is an abundance of clean, renewable, natural energy from the sun, wind and tides that is sufficient for populations much greater than currently inhabits the earth. That is why the future of transport is electric.
@MrMontgomeryM ...but it will spread out to become heat at ambient temperature - no longer usable. If we could recirculate that heat with little effort to become the original fuel again ... yes, then you would be right.
We now have the knowledge, technology & resources to make these ideas a reality. Enter The Venus Project & Mr. Jacque Fresco. Our human problems are technical not political. The only thing holding us back from this reality is...the monetary system which is failing. Everything eventually comes to an end. However, a New Beginning is the start of a beginning's end. Check out thezeitgeistmovement and thevenusproject & join this new beginning.
@QuantumQuacks Im tired of ignorant assholes like you! Weed crops and hemp crops are 2 different things,you can support Hemp products and not smoke weed asshole!
Many houses are heated with geothermia today. EV1 was a reality over a decade ago. Huge battery rooms are a reality (see 4th energy revolution as a source). Netbooks are highly efficient technology. You're not up to date.
@trakkaton Geothermal heat pumps are not geothermal energy. They are not a source of energy, but a use of electrical energy; achieving only slightly greater COP than working against air.
Huge batteries are a reality, unfortunately it is not their storage capacity that is huge; it is their physical size, resource demands and cost per kWh stored(storage alone costs ~15 US cent per kWh using the cheapest availble).
EV1 was an uneconomic piece of crap a decade ago and it still is.
Geothermal heat pumps are a source of energy. Heat is a form of energy. They are highly efficient and need almost no energy input.
Huge batteries are already applied in 100% renewable cities. Just because capitalism is a system full of inefficiency, shortsightedness and inequality that is hardly an argument against efficient long-term solutions.
EV1 was a superb automobile, that's why thousands of people even started confrontations to not give them away again.
Recently I took part in a counselling programme for senior management at a UK energy supplier.
Many participants talked about the ‘shame’ they felt for overcharging vulnerable members of the public and deliberately cutting service to enhance profit margins. We were instructed to offer them solace, assuring them they were serving the community as good citizens & go on about they were helping to combat climate change.
When I refused to toe the line & offered criticism, I was forced out.
True Free energy devices exist,But Elite controllers don't want ppl to be free from the costs of energy,Get the blueprints for a real Magnet motor free enegy machine at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Join the revolution!
I'll believe we's gonna make it when tv news say they found a replacement for oil based fertilizer that electric trailers and harvesting machine are being manufactured and that oil based medecines, polyestes for clothes, lubricants, inks,paints, ASPHALT, cosmetics, ANTISEPTICS and an tons of other stuff madefrom oil all got subtitutuion products.
Otherwise we can all kiss goodbye to ou way of life!
Why continue with dirty energy when clean energy is so clear? Because the market has determined it's too expensive. The market will always win. Once fossil fuels become too expensive, then we will move to renewable resources. It's really quite simple- the market does work.
@diggingforgold Switching too fast when the market suddenly demands it will cause very high energy prices. That is not something to look forward to and should be avoided.
WEC 2010 and their site energy2point0 is the place we all should be debating in order to get all stakeholders around a same community energy2point0 The only way to have a constructive debate... AND the big GUYS WILL LISTEN...
This is GENI, which is a profit motive non profit to obtain what is really a part of world game started by bucky fuller. I do not think it should be renamed to obtain money. It should be kept whole in the world game that included this plan of a world system integration of radiation gathering and focus. At least now they admit where it came from. I suppose it is fair to rip off and at least it be looked at. But to keep it world game makes it united with the rest of the plan so that people see it.
Renewable energy is a must.....there are so many sources. All we need to do is DO IT!!!!!! All it is about is the money. The politicos of the world do not care. We the people must get it on track. Cut are energy use , cut our water use. RECYCLE all you can. I can go on but you all know what to do...every little bit helps.
@VederchiHarry the only answer is power saving. dont drive so often with your car use as little water as possible and build or buy a low energy house. we can save soooo much energy. than the renewable energy is enough for this planet. and you would wait for fusion ?? hm no no lets wait. 50 years later... people die because there is no food and no work. no no lets wait for fusion. you cannot wait for it. you have to change your way of life !
@drumpfuscher You are day dreaming! How long is it going to take for us to rebuild most of our houses and save a lot of power??? 50 years? We'll have Fusion by then! Do You know that the manufacturing of solar panels engenders a lot of pollution ! That the wind turbine kill lots of birds are ugly! Dams have a negative impact on nature and provoke earthquakes! ''Renewable enegy'' will never be sufficient enough to supply the people that dont have access to electricity!
@VederchiHarry yes i know that wind turbines kills birds but do you know how many lives oil and gas kost. we dont have the time to wait for fusion. we cannot say. "oh doesnt matter oil is running out because fusion will come in the future!" and waiste energy. the only thing i want to say is that we have to save energy. and i dont think this is day dreaming. i work as a solarpanel intallateur and electric car seller ok. i know what i am talking about. and humans are the negative impact on nature
@VederchiHarry and you can start to save energy NOW. with every little thing. with energy saving bulbs and travelcommunitys. and eat more vegetables and not meat. buy electric cars. isolate your house. in germany theese things are normal. its not that hard but it has a big effect. so i would say you are daydreaming if you are sitting at home and wait for change. You have to change the future of your kids. i dont want to start a fight
@drumpfuscher Arguing is not fighting! never heard of democracy? My point is that renewable energy will never be sufficient! Since You are working with solar pannels calculate the area needed to provide 50% of today's world energy (including transport)! And dont use the max power that You can get at midday!
Even if we save a lot of power, the poor will never have access to energy!
Finally... I have a very bad news for You. Until will master Fusion... Our main source of energy will be... COAL!
@VederchiHarry but when will fusion be reality and if it works when will we be able to use it. and how long will it take to build thoose electric station. even if it will come in the future. it will take loooong time to use it. and even if coal would be the main source of energy we have to save energy ! and yes there are many people who never have acces to power but this is now and will be in the future.
@drumpfuscher check the website ''ITER''. The fusion reactor will be finished by 2020 and will produce 500MgW for 50MgW used.By 2040 they will start to produce industrial electricity on a significant scale. By the end of this century, FUSION will replace most of the other energy production.
FUSION is the power of the SUN! There is no pollution and Hydrogen is an inexhaustible ressource (since You can get it from water)
By the way, the real water problem is not so much quantity, but quality!
@VederchiHarry I have high hopes for fusion power, but not tokamaks.
D-D fusion looks barely workable in a tokamak. If tokamaks ever become a viable power source they will run on D-T fusion for a very long time; and they will probably use a fission blanket(which could melt down from decay heat in a LOCA)
Lithium is not all that abundant, which is the fuel these reactors will chew through. Sustainable for millions of years, like uranium and thorium breeders, but not indefinitely.
@Phi16180 Thank you! On the chance you are a rare environmentalist with an open mind, you ought to read up on LFTs - By far the most environmentally friendly form of energy we can create.
I invented a breakthrough energy source that contradicts the law of energy conservation. I have a PROOF that there are electrodynamic phenomena that contradict the law of energy conservation. I am looking for $300 000 for a prototype and for $3M for patents. Making a 6 kW generator will cost $1200 in mass production, value of energy produced yearly $5400.
Can't see y any1 here wld tag this "spam;" it cld b the most important post ever on YouTube! It cld change the whole course of history!
I must get in on the "ground floor." Though I don't have $300k in liquid assets, I can hook u up w/ a reliable, near-limitless capital source.
I'm great friends w/the widow of Nigeria's late Pres Sani Abacha, & am helping her 2 access the $100million only now w/ a security co. Send me yr e-mail address, and let's make history 2gether!
@foringjar612.. I can't deny that there are no significant costs for the adoption of windturbines as you say. Wind cannot be the dominant form of energy production, but will be part of the solution. So despite the costs, I still do believe that a 'combination' of several renewable energysources could be used in a succesfull way for generating electricty. I didn't say that oil can be replaced easily, but we can save oil on the longterm with renewable energy investments nowadays. So far!
We have these turbines all over my state. 200 are visable from my house. All of this energy is sent 800 miles to calif. This talk of renewable energy is great with the pretty pictures and 60's music. But until it's available to all of us, not just the money people, it's another administration in control with big business. Instead of oil, it's wind. The inconveinent truth is...here are all these windmills and we are still using coal for electricity. Glad our governor didn't become president.
No, you dont understand, oil, transports food and makes plasic... and things that we call modern....like computers, steel, rubber and cars.
Renewables cannot do that..... finite reserves = finite things u can make from them which still means that theres a good chance that these rnewables have come to late.
Dont forget, that peoples minds need to change, and that all these "clean energies" will not supply even a mediocre percentage of energy needs.
Watch the videos on utube:
Endgame, invisible empire, truth and lies of 9/11, collapse.
6 billion people and only limited reources. Prior to the oil/coal discoveries there were localised industry and people had land to grow there own food. Now that has reversed and people live in concrete cities with limited areas to grow food.
yes agreeable, but the western world still uses about 70 - 80% of the resources.
now that a population dense china, india are coming into the need for oil products, we will see a population explosion and demand will outstrip supply of resources, Namely OIL. from this point, prices will skyrocket and the dollar will be devalued from the banking bailouts...... leading to a collapse.
from here countries will enforce draconian laws to control the population, if u havnt died already
to tell you the truth, renewable energy sources are free to use. Free energy doesn't exist, but free sources do. Sources like wind, solar and hydro will play (and are already playing) a major role, especially in the developing countries like India and China. It's not just wind or solar which will make the difference, but it'll be mixture of all kind of renewable energy sources.
Did you know why the use of solar energy has not been opened up yet? Because the oil industry does not own the sun!
@ScoutWout If solar energy is a free source of energy, then so is oil. All you have to do is dig it out of the ground(or alternately make it from CO2 and water, using some other free energy source).
Water contains enough deuterium that if fused to helium-4 in 2 steps it contains ~100 times the energy of an equivalent amount of oil. You just have to build a fusion reactor.
Solar is an unsustainable piece of crap despite a century of fawning adulation; doesn't look set to change.
@soylentgreenb well there is solar - also solar thermal - also geo thermal- wind- tide ocean current- hydro- advanced fuel cells like the bloom box - also new nano antenna that covert infra red to electricity - pressure transducers( can be put anywhere anything moves including buildings) - and other forms of clean energy and more being developed
@MrIzzyDizzy Solar PV, solar thermal and wind are currently at best a way to save a little bit of fuel at dirt burners(or fossil fuel plants as you might like to call them). What is required to take them from token energy sources, mostly use to greenwash natural gas, to something that could really power the grid is crushingly expensive and dangerous both politically and otherwise.
@soylentgreenb politicaly dangerous ? other wise? expensive? - they are only expensive in money and we may not ever have the " money" - but we do have the know how the resources and the desire to use and develope them - just the need for profit to do anything is a hindrance - abundant clean energy would not yield aprofit - abundance like say oxegen in the atmosphere is not profitable - as morgan said when stopping tesslas wireless electrcity - where do we put the meter?
There will never be a utopia where we are all friends and sing kumbayah. That powerline is also a weapon, just like oil is a weapon.
You recreate the politics of oil, where we go in and bomb people into submission and install tyrants who keep the oil flowing; but this time you do it with solar farms and to protect power lines instead.
@MrIzzyDizzy The definition of sustainable is being able to supply the needs of today without comprimising the needs of tomorrow. Unreliables cannot supply the needs of today; there's this massive piece of the puzzle missing; hence world-spanning electrical grids, V2G and other rube goldberg machines to try and deal with the flaws.
Currently only oil is a major geopolitical problem. You're advocating making the entire energy supply the same kind of geopolitical problem.
Wow, you really know NOTHING about energy. One of the great advantages of renewables is that EVERYONE can have a power plant in his backyard or on his roof, be it wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, etc. It is decentral and democratic. Not everyone sits on oil. You are unable to grasp simple facts.
HARBON ENERGY
Hydrogen loves to fly. It's light as Heaven and radiant beyond belief.
Carbon is Earth's grand art medium. It's a well-grounded expression of creation.
They belong together. They're a match made in Heaven.
They can mate in the figure 8s of infinite energy. In their union is born Harbon -- a temporary element of fusion that retains the properties of both parents, yet radiates powerful energy, which can be tapped in home generators.
We can let those sleeping dinosaurs rest in peace.
eastariel 5 days ago
Any whiteppl tell me why you guys are so proud of your so-called technologis and luxury lifestyle?
9ying9 2 weeks ago
Those wars are fought in order to preserve the lifestyle Americans are used to. God forbid production decreases Americans will go batshit and start eating each other, I.E New Orleans post Katrina
filip34pp 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
as far externalities - they are also higher in china because of less enviromental regulation and greater for longer distance transportation of goods
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
lol our sientific human capitol is fading in the us - most phd level scientist in our schools are foriegn boen and -often return to thier country of origin - as far as labor it should be measured vs labor - we dont have a shortage of it here - we just dont have a massive oversupply - the monetary cost of labor is like 70$ a month in china and $2000-5000 here so its cheaper but actual resource cost is higher incuding labor inputs - so money just measures supply not effiecieny
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
They are not compensating when they come take your home. I have my house and vacant 5 acres. I have no debt but I have all my $ in real estate and the plan is no more home ownership or cars.
Lovinight 1 month ago
I dont get it. If it's so easy, why dont people change? Why must politicians be so ignorant? I cannot understand why we humans are so stupid and selfish... It's making me sick -.-
ScrapySweet 1 month ago
@ScrapySweet Despite a century of fawning adulation solar and wind are still not even sustainable(capable of meeting the needs of today without compromising the needs of the future).
A world-spanning energy grid is just another idiotic bandaid to cover for the failings of non-hydro "renewables". It is very fragile(e.g. to geomagnetic storms), very expensive(transmission is a huge part of electricity cost; why aren't coal plants at the mine mouth?) and very politically dangerous.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
Solar power should be cheaper than oil by the 2020s, if so everything will be fine.
deanmullen10 2 months ago
Its not a crisis of energy, its just a huge problem because it costs more. And, unfortunelty, no country has any interest in loosing money.
gulbirk 2 months ago
@gulbirk Sure, it costs more if the accounting system is based on promissory notes. However, when physical and ecological costs are taken into account through a universal medium upon which all processes and systems depend, such as Energy, the relative costs and sustainability make recurrent sources of Energy (e.g., the various forms of solar and geothermal) much more attractive than finite materials which are more useful as raw materials for manufacturing.
AceObrin 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Indeed ignorance! In 1982 Sweden decided to replace its 12 nuclear reactors with renewable energy sources by 2012 . Today still 8 reactors are in operation, a few thousands windmills deliver ca 2% of the total need, while the rest is bought from coal powered plants in Denmark. Thank you "environmentalists" - learn about entropy instead and wake up! (you can do that in my channel on YouTube).
Thermospecialist 3 months ago
If only our governments would focus more on this then on pointless destructive wars...
curingaging00 3 months ago 6
/watch?v=aUVq81kBKyk&feature=relmfu
jaeLAX23 4 months ago
Did you guys forget that there is huge power loss when moving electricity over large distances?
germain505 4 months ago
@germain505 With 1 Million-volt DC lines buried underground, it could be as low as 10%. That's hardly huge, considering the result could still be on the order of 100 times as much energy for everyone as the amount of work they could perform through their labor. Energy is actually abundant, not scarce at all, we simply need to develop the WILL to implement well-known and understood methods of harnessing the various forms of solar energy and geothermal. The price system is a major hindrance here.
AceObrin 2 months ago
@germain505 You can make the energy losses arbitrarily low; it is just a question of thicker wires and higher voltages.
What you can't do is do it at a price anyone is willing to pay; or without recreating the disgusting geopolitics that exist with oil, were you install friendly dictators in "problem countries" along the major lines and equatorial solar farms; or protect yourself from geomagnetic storms that darken half the globe; or have political autonomy.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
WIND MACHINES ARE KILLING BIRDS AND BATS IN THE NORTHEAST. YEA THIS WAS A STUPID STUPID IDEA.
Boris82much 5 months ago
@Boris82much Listen you stupid piece of shit. Planes kill more birds than wind turbines. There are over 400 Bird Strikes a year. A YEAR! With planes and helicopters. Get a fucking life
johnairlines8 4 months ago
It is very sad that corruption reigns supreme, we deserve to share the world with each other and love each other.
EliteDoomer 5 months ago
I know it's all about greed and power. But one other thing wind turbines cost billions and are you willing to pay for that out of your taxes? I believe in renewable energy but it won't be free people. The energy companies will spend billions on renewable energy and we will have to pay for some of it's development edf energy has alreadly informed me my bill will go up cos of investment into wind turbines/renewable energy projects.
AntecGreeno83 4 months ago
@AntecGreeno83 I would pay higher taxes for a sustainable system. Would you rather pay lower taxes for one that collapses?
EliteDoomer 4 months ago 5
@EliteDoomer we cant there with money - all monetary market systems require scarcity and poverty - research the resource based economy -a good start would be zeitgeist addendum -zeitgeist moving forward -zeitnews - anything about the resource based economy or the venus project - abundance for all and peace
MrIzzyDizzy 2 months ago 3
@MrIzzyDizzy Technocracy, Incorporated, is an even better source, I would contend. See any essay by M. King Hubbert, Howard Scott, Ron Miller, and the like. Jacques Fresco, of the Venus Project, has several good essays as well, and is a former member of Technocracy, INC.
AceObrin 2 months ago
@MrIzzyDizzy Resources are always scarce and will always need to be allocated sensibly. If we had 100 times more energy, we would just find more uses for energy and it would be seemingly just as scarce again.
You can't get there with money because prices make it obvious that you are squandering resources doing something that makes no damn sense; everyone can see that the emperor is naked despite all the glossy .PDFs and all the smoke you're trying to blow up people's arse.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb confusing response - not sure you understand money makets - and how they waste resources and how structural monetary cost and requirements for profit actualy waste and limit resource availbility - we can make 100s to 1000s of time more food with less resources - while this may not be infinite - by the time the population is 700 billion to 7 trillion( hopefully never) if ever we will probably be able to make anything from almost anything at the molecular level with nano technology
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy No, you cannot make 100 to 1000 times more food with less resources; particularly not food people actually want to eat at reasonable environmental cost. Macroscopic plants are getting pretty close to the limits set by biology and single celled algae and cyanobacteria are frought with all sorts of problems(palatability being the least of them; it takes a lot of energy, a lot of capital and a hermetically sealed system to prevent contamination by competing algae).
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy Zeitgeist nutters live in the same utopian world that socialists, anarcho-capitalists and other utopian nutters live in; one that exists only in their own mind and doesn't have to deal with all the problems and limitations that exist in the real world.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb its not utopian only the best known solutions we have which are always changing
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb basic example of market waste ,is it obviosly waste resource to ship raw materials from the us to china (it takes more fuel ship and labor) and to assemble them using more labor there( they arent as efficient as our factories) and then ship the finished products - 4000-7000 or more miles to the u.s. (again fuel ships and labor wasted) -yet its cost effiecent -so clearly markets dont represent actual resource cost only money cost - thats 1 reason why you cant get there with money
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy No, that's an example of idealists(namely you) wanting to minimize the use of one resources(energy) at a much greater cost of another(human capital).
Container-ships are extraordinarily efficient.
All labour is not equal. It is not a fungible good. Education level is generally much higher in the US; it makes no sense to waste it on repetitive mechanical labour.
Where you get into trouble with markets is externalities and fraud; and that's why we have regulation.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
One day a supercomputer will collect all the youtube debates, and process them,
turn it into a battle of words to collect an average of truths and beliefs.
Through a complex algorithm, they will churn out the relative truth.
student135 6 months ago
@student135
Haha! Truth is not based on popular belief, though.
ThorkilKowalski 6 months ago
@student135 Since when was truth determined by the most shrill?
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
We need to tackle the reason free energy is suppressed and thwarted. It's out there and the planet could have been clean 50 years ago. I just found this vid because it has the same title as the one I just made! There is No Energy Crisis Part 1-3
Gypsey1304 7 months ago
Obama's Economic Advisory Council headed by General Electric Chairman Jeffrey Immelt? Was it GE that designed the fucked up nuclear reactors in Fukushima - you know the ones where they didn't bother disposing of the used fuel rods and just chucked 40 years worth on the roof- that blew up and spewed MOX fuel into the atmosphere that has now circled the Earth many times and has every human breathing 5 to 10 radioactive hot particles per day - probably giving everyone cancer in the next 10 years?
BiggerThinking1 7 months ago
@BiggerThinking1
I seriously hope that comment was a joke. MOX fuel is not airborne. Only the fissile products are.
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski WRONG = when the plant exloded - 40 years of spent M<OX fuel rods were on the roof went sky high and got into the jetstream - circulating the world.
BiggerThinking1 7 months ago
Comment removed
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@BiggerThinking1
Where do you get this kind of misleading information?
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski
What misleading info? Are you denying that
1) Mox fuel rods were stored on he roof of fukushima reactor 3?
2) That it exploded?
3) That MOX fuel particles were released into the atmosphere?
Whether fission isotopes also exist is utterly irrelevant - a separate aspect.
BiggerThinking1 7 months ago
@BiggerThinking1
1) and 2) are correct. 3) is not.
-
I didn't say that fission product isotopes ALSO existed in the atmosphere. I said that they were the ONLY occurring isotopes which resulted from Fukushima. If there was Uranium or Plutonium in the atmosphere, we would be able to measure it. And futhermore, Uranium and Plutonium cannot be airborne.
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski why> is it cos U and Pt are too heavy? Heavier than air particles can carry a lng way in strong wind.
BiggerThinking1 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski Point 3) is essentially what arnie gundersen said. Is he the only one spouting this idea of hot particles? I sure hope he is and its a crackpot idea - but seems plausible.
BiggerThinking1 6 months ago
@BiggerThinking1
I just read some of his statements on the Fukushima accident. To me, it seems like a crackpot idea and, as I said, measurements from Russia (by me) and from the US (link: cemp[dot]dri[dot]edu/cemp/japan_response[dot]html) show only the following radioactive isotopes:iodine-131,cesium-134 and 137, xenon-133, and tellurium-132. If there would have been any uranium or plutonium, it would have been discovered in some of these measurements.
ThorkilKowalski 6 months ago
@BiggerThinking1
Wrong. I have actually measured the radioactive particles released from this nuclear power plant accident in a class in experimental nuclear engineering. The radioactive isotopes found in a station in Russia were the following: 131,132I, 132Te,134Cs,137Cs. These are all fission products, not fuel particles! Don't believe me? read this:
arxiv [dot] org/abs/1103.5954
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
400 feet underground and is only a thin sliver of coal. Finally, nuclear energy is not a fossil fuel- i think that you need to educate yourself before making a comment.
andygd8 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski the ipcc and the british geological survey agree that we willdefinitely run out of fossil fuels soon. there is an estimated 60trillion cu ft of gas left, which at CURRENT consumption will last for 50years, but consumption will almost definitely increase. an estimated 800 million barrels of oil remaining, which will last untill 2055, and although there is enough coal to last for 1000 years, it is not economically viable to extract it as a large proportion of this coal lies over
andygd8 7 months ago
@andygd8
I am looking at the BP Statistical Review of World Energy from June 2011 right now. (the most respected source on these issues) The numbers are:
6608.9 trillion cubic feet (that is about 100 times more than you stated) and that gives an R/P ratio of 58.6 years.
-
The funny thing is that I also have the numbers for 1990 - there the reserves were 4441,8 tr. cu feet. So the known reserves have increased 49% in 20 years. What makes you think we are not going to find more?
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
Wong. The fossil fuels will not deplete over the next century. There is plenty of oil, coal, gas and nuclear. Educate yourself before making a video about it, damnit!
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski wrong, you educate your self... nuclear isent a natural recourse and yes oil is running out ans yes gas is running out. your to naive to notice
jesusfreak2123 7 months ago
@jesusfreak2123
I have obviously educated myself more than thou. People have been saying that we would soon run out of oil for more than 100 years and they have been proven wrong again and again. If you actually start studying these things seriously instead of watching YouTube videos about it, you will be amazed how obvious it is: You will not see the end of affordable oil and neither will your children (unless governments ban drilling). I can guarantee you that.
-
-
And it's "too", not "to".
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski clearly then you have not because 100 years before it was 1911 where oil had started finally booming. then, the word "global warming" had not existed. back then the lack of oil was not even talked of because no person except the richest people even used cars. and you are wrong, oil is depleting. oil is created by fossils trapped in the ground and by pressure. it takes millions of years to create it and in a couple of decades we have greatly depleted it.
jesusfreak2123 7 months ago
@jesusfreak2123
If you want to start educating yourself, you can watch this:
watch?v=6v3w4eyXVWE
And you can take a look at BP statistical Review of World Energy.
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski no matter what you say, it is known and fact that oil and natural gases are being depleted. in 50 to 60 years it will be so depleted that only the most wealthiest on nations will be able to acquire it. so yes our children may still have it, but it will cost much more than 3 dollars/gallon higher than 10 probably. while the rest of the world suffers with no electricity to power the growing population of earth. even in america parts will have no electricity. you are being naive
jesusfreak2123 7 months ago
@jesusfreak2123
No. I have actually studied this from primary sources. I study energy technology.
\[T]he growing difficulties of management and extraction of coal in a very deep mine
must greatly enhance its price. It is by this rise of price that gradual exhaustion will be
manifested, and its deplorable e ects occasioned" (p. 7).
W. S. Jevons (1866), \The Coal Question"
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski wow.... really? again you are taking facts from more than a hundred years ago! in 1866, the extraction of coal was the problem because they didnt have the technology to take it out. today, we do. you just got proved wrong with your own proof...
jesusfreak2123 7 months ago
@jesusfreak2123
You are totally right for the first time in this debate. When technology improves, we can extract more. So what would your response be if I told you that the global average extraction rate of oil fields is 35 % and that the available reserves are based on this number. Please do the math...
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski what you are not understanding is that by using MATH, scientist and geologist alike are able to find out, (even if extraction rates are 35% even though you havent given me any proof they are) how much oil and gases there are left in the extraction site. they know how much will be left.
jesusfreak2123 7 months ago
@jesusfreak2123
No. The R/P ratio is based on a low extraction rate and a higher extraction rate increases the ratio.
-
A reserve is defined as that which has already been found and is economically extractable with current technologies. So new technology and new explorations increase the reserves. But this costs money so usually the R/P ratio is around 40 years and it has been so for a hundred years. No crisis seems to be imminent.
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
Comment removed
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
Comment removed
ThorkilKowalski 7 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski I agree. However, fuel prices will likely rise in the very near future due to increased living standards throughout the world. The auto industry will continue to improve combustion engine efficiencies beyond current standards, increases in the mileage range of electric vehicles, and efficient production of biofuels at larger scales will very likely keep oil prices at least within the near future at affordable rates.
chroniclerofthe70s 6 months ago
@chroniclerofthe70s
Try reading the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2011. You will see that the reserves rise faster than the production and consumption of oil. I don't think that is about to change. The rising oil prices are partly due to money printing.
ThorkilKowalski 6 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski It is a very thorough report. As I suspected, China's rapid industrialization and growing infrastructure is partly contributing to increasing demands for crude oil.
chroniclerofthe70s 6 months ago
@chroniclerofthe70s
I am glad you looked at the report. Don't you find it interesting and surprising that the oil reserves are growing faster than production and consumption? Is that the general story you hear in mainstream medias? I found it encouraging and surprising.
ThorkilKowalski 6 months ago
@ThorkilKowalski Reserves rise fast because oil is expensive and reserves is always about the amount of oil you can extract at some price. The problem has never been a shortage of fossil fuels.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@QuantumQuacks
Geothermal. Volcanic place that’s fairly stable, which has hot bowser and a lake near by. Put a large tank filled with water into the super heate water . Connect a pipe from the tank to a generator and then lead the pipe to a massive radiator in the cold lake. When pressure builds the generator turns and walla you got an underground renewable steam generator.
153SCORN 8 months ago
We should start thinking only in clean energy, although the transition from non-renewable to renewable will be difficult.....................it's not impossible. We are the new generation lets start forgetting fossil fuels
nouva3ra 8 months ago
NEVER!!!! renewable energy yes, interconnection NO!!! interconection is potentially unsafe and only makes us vulnerable on a larger scale to a number of exegenous factors. Energy security is on of the factors that must be taken into consideration!
armando6767 8 months ago
@armando6767
While most people will think like this, there will be always wars. Wars for resources hidden with any other reasons. Nuclear power plants are actually quite green, it's only people's greed and ambition that makes them dangerous. Both Japanese Fukushima and Chernobyl are good examples, those disaster could be avoided. There are countries where it's extremely difficult to produce renewable energy and there are those that have A LOT of potential. But this won't be used... ever.
Xellts 8 months ago
@bogusnachos How much mining is required to yield 1 ton of thorium? Just wondering ...What s the half life of thorium? How much environmental cost is that? And in ballpark figures, how many millions of dollars does it cost us? And WE would profit, right? NOT the corporation who owns the spigot? That requires a paradigm shift, too.
chubbsuperfly 8 months ago
@chubbsuperfly In the lemhi pass in Idaho there are veins close to the surface which contain .4 to .6 percent thorium. So perhaps 400 tons of earth moved for one ton of thorium. That's is the energy equivalent to 3 million tons of coal. I think to 400 tons is better. Thorium 232 half life is about 12 billion years, meaning it is only slightly radioactive. After being run through the reactor, the radioactivity lasts about 300 years.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@chubbsuperfly Thorium is almost worthless, $30,000 for a ton would give us a Gigawatt Year of electricity about $800,000,000 worth at ten cents a kwh. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors would be much simpler a cheaper than current light water reactors and would produce less then 1/1000 the waste. Estimate for construction run around $2 a watt capacity - so 2 billion for a gigawatt reactor (the can be scaled down to 4 megawatts and up to - multiple gigawats. 3 cents kwh.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@chubbsuperfly Thorium reactors are just talk now in the US (china, india,france and russia are working on them). We built and operated such a reactor in the 60s and 70s at Oak Ridge National Labratories. The only problem with it was it didn't make plutonium - needed for weapons. With the cheap energy from thorium, we can synthesize the fuels we need from air and water - see "Green Freedom" lanl. Thorium could make fossil fuels obsolete.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@chubbsuperfly I would hope this would be used to benifit the world. Thorium is everywhere - no nation or group of nations could possibly form a cartel. The thorium reactor doesn't require water, so it could be placed anywhere and its compact. I have no idea how the new industry would be set up.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
Pass!!!!!!! Renewable energy is key, however until we possess the resources to run off nothing but renewable energy we must continue to use what we have. To lower the cost of that measure we need to use our own resources and stop depending on other countries to supply us will that which we need.
petis1976 8 months ago
What about Nuclear? A liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor eliminate or greatly reduces ALL of the problems with current nuclear plants (which are the best form of energy we have today). Wind and Solar are expensive, unreliable and use a huge amount of land and materials Thorium can provide the cleanest energy for the entire world for millions of years (even at American consumption rate).
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@bogusnachos How much mining is required to yield 1 ton of thorium? Just wondering how many acres of slag, how many thousands of gallons of diesel to power the shovels and earth movers, and trains and trucks that transport the ore, how much energy is needed to refine the ore, then transport it to the reactor, which requires how much concrete and steel, water and wire, and the construction site, etc. to finally come online?
chubbsuperfly 8 months ago
soon 8 billion...ya, im 2 blame 4 that...what?..me so horny.
chadberry75 8 months ago
In order to explore the various alternatives to solve the energy crisis situation, Greenwich University is holding an International Conference on Energy Crisis Management. For more details and updates, plz visit Greenwich University's homepage
mskiren82 8 months ago
No alternative energy is capable of sustaining a growing society unless you decrease demand. Decreasing demand will be the goal of the NWO not finding alternative energy sources. To lower demand they will regulate and diminish commerical and industrial growth, lower quality of life standards, decrease populations, regulate residential usage with smart meters, taxes, blackouts, decrease suburban areas. This is the easiest and surest route to energy sustainability for atheists and enviros
JesusNonEnviromental 9 months ago
@JesusNonEnviromental If the current population growth rate stays the same, then in the year 4022 there will be 13,000 people for every square foot of land on this planet. At some point we will have population control, the only question is what type.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@bogusnachos Lets worry about tomorrow and take one day at a time. Do you actually plan your day according to what the population will be in 2,000 yrs Today, insanity would be some sign of intelligence
JesusNonEnviromental 8 months ago
@JesusNonEnviromental Sorry you missed my point that geometric growth cannot be sustained. I used 2011 years from now for a reason - that Jesus is still important today as he was 2000 years ago just as the decisions we make on population will be important 2000 years from now. If we know anything from history, it is that god does not provide, he allows massive amounts of death and suffering.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
@bogusnachos If the current rate of change in birth rates and death rates stay the same, in year 4022 humanity would have voluntarily gone extinct by refusing to have babies.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb True. The birth rate has been declining rapidly over the past 30 years is every country in the world. There are virtually no countries with a GDP per capita of $7000 or more with a birth rate of over 2.5 children per woman.
bogusnachos 1 month ago
Men are always afraid and fearful and nothing is more dangerous. Men do not believe in a loving and sovereign God who provides for his creation, but believes the world is a struggle for survival and population growth has become their greatest fear. Men have stopped promoting freedom and prosperity because they believe these are the catalysts for population growth so they will begin to regulate and control both. They will have you believe that death is benefiscial and provides sustainabiltiy
JesusNonEnviromental 9 months ago
@JesusNonEnviromental What evidence do you have that God "provides". God allow pandemic, natural disasters, famine. I have never hear of a reliable case of food miraculously appearing. If you understand geometric growth, then you know that at our growth rate, in a few thousand years the entire surface of the earth would be hundreds of feet deep in people. Of course there will be a massive die off before that happens. God does not provide, man does.
bogusnachos 8 months ago
Renewable energy is the way of the future, and has huge business potential. We are creating leaders in the field of green energy every day. If you have the spirit and mindset to get out in the world and educate people about renewable energy, you have unlimited potential in this field.
Find me @fundgreenpower on twitter
havenjm 9 months ago
Linking the world's electrical grid? what a dumb idea.
More than half of the electricity is lost in transmission lines in less than a thousand miles of wiring. How much will be lost in transmission lines that go on for thousands of miles across continents? You have to build twice as many power plants just to make up for all that loss, requiring twice as much energy. And the cost of infrastructure will be enormous.
Vulcan750L 9 months ago
we are going to change to electric motors before our oil runs out.. duh!
student135 10 months ago
@student135 ... and where will the electric power come from, if not from oil?
Thermospecialist 9 months ago
@Thermospecialist ...haha i was trying to be sarcastic sorry , i FAILED
student135 6 months ago
permanent magnet motor-generators use attracting and repulsing forces to generate motion.
viperxraptor2001 10 months ago
We can all help the transition to clean renewable energy by only buying green electricity for your home or business.
kaieteurdevon 10 months ago
Scientists are working on a new method of generating energy by using a sub dermal neurophone to place a quantum harmonizer into a photon resonation chamber. Of course there is always a risk of causing a parabolic destabilization of the fission singularity.
afropaladin 10 months ago
'There is no energy crisis' Bull sh*t.
I realy dont beleive that every car, truck, tracktor, airplane, ship can be run on clean electricity.
I am 25 and i beleive that in my life time when oil runs out there could be a world wide famine. Food is getting more and more expensive due to the ever increasing cost of oil.
english0 10 months ago
@english0 All vehicles can use clean electricity to power them, we already have many examples of cars, trucks, airplane's all running from clean green electricity sources.
kaieteurdevon 10 months ago
@kaieteurdevon I think you have mistaken me for an idiot. Of cause i am aware of this. The point i am trying to make is that it would not be possible for EVERY vehicle to run on green energy. The world is over crowded and it is not possible to meet everyone's energy demands from green sources alone, even if the 3rd world could afford them.
english0 10 months ago
@english0 You said ”I realy dont beleive that every car can be run on clean electricity.”
You are mistaken. There is an abundance of clean, renewable, natural energy from the sun, wind and tides that is sufficient for populations much greater than currently inhabits the earth. That is why the future of transport is electric.
kaieteurdevon 10 months ago
@english0 There is no energy crisis, energy cannot be created nor can it be destroyed, ergo it will not run out.
MrMontgomeryM 9 months ago
@MrMontgomeryM ...but it will spread out to become heat at ambient temperature - no longer usable. If we could recirculate that heat with little effort to become the original fuel again ... yes, then you would be right.
Thermospecialist 9 months ago
thanks for keeping it simple. Has Obama, his wife, and children, seen it? Has it been shown in every classroom worldwide?
TheZodabeast 10 months ago
**** Support EcoCowboys! Visit us at wwwecocowboyscom ****
MonsterCrypt 11 months ago
Garbage!
The SOLUTION is
2011 - FREE ENERGY FOR ALL please inform yourself and others!
Arche2011 1 year ago
Good luck fighting big energy's influence in Washington.....
MrEnergyCzar 1 year ago 26
We now have the knowledge, technology & resources to make these ideas a reality. Enter The Venus Project & Mr. Jacque Fresco. Our human problems are technical not political. The only thing holding us back from this reality is...the monetary system which is failing. Everything eventually comes to an end. However, a New Beginning is the start of a beginning's end. Check out thezeitgeistmovement and thevenusproject & join this new beginning.
Love - Mamma D
lspmd2 1 year ago
Watch ZEITGEIST ADDENDUM. Very good awakening about that :)
copie692012 1 year ago 10
@copie692012 I've watched that too it's eye-opening
AntecGreeno83 3 months ago
@QuantumQuacks Im tired of ignorant assholes like you! Weed crops and hemp crops are 2 different things,you can support Hemp products and not smoke weed asshole!
DaAlphaOmega 1 year ago
one word,HEMP!!
DaAlphaOmega 1 year ago
GENI I disagree
We don't need to develop new technology?
1 Still have not developed technology to harness geothermals
2 We still have not made batteries capable of storing the power we generate fast and efficiently.
3 Still have not made highly efficient generators.
4 Still have not developed efficiency in appliances.
5 All our vehicle designs are NOT conducive to electrical power.
It will cost millions of trillions and we don’t have time
153SCORN 1 year ago
@153SCORN number 1 is inaccurate. Geothermals is frequently used for heating houses.
DraconicBovine 1 year ago
@153SCORN
Many houses are heated with geothermia today. EV1 was a reality over a decade ago. Huge battery rooms are a reality (see 4th energy revolution as a source). Netbooks are highly efficient technology. You're not up to date.
trakkaton 1 year ago
@trakkaton Geothermal heat pumps are not geothermal energy. They are not a source of energy, but a use of electrical energy; achieving only slightly greater COP than working against air.
Huge batteries are a reality, unfortunately it is not their storage capacity that is huge; it is their physical size, resource demands and cost per kWh stored(storage alone costs ~15 US cent per kWh using the cheapest availble).
EV1 was an uneconomic piece of crap a decade ago and it still is.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb
Geothermal heat pumps are a source of energy. Heat is a form of energy. They are highly efficient and need almost no energy input.
Huge batteries are already applied in 100% renewable cities. Just because capitalism is a system full of inefficiency, shortsightedness and inequality that is hardly an argument against efficient long-term solutions.
EV1 was a superb automobile, that's why thousands of people even started confrontations to not give them away again.
trakkaton 1 month ago
we need to stop thinking of us all as we...we are individuals that shouldnt be forced into your collective control
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
Recently I took part in a counselling programme for senior management at a UK energy supplier.
Many participants talked about the ‘shame’ they felt for overcharging vulnerable members of the public and deliberately cutting service to enhance profit margins. We were instructed to offer them solace, assuring them they were serving the community as good citizens & go on about they were helping to combat climate change.
When I refused to toe the line & offered criticism, I was forced out.
SuperTruth77 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
True Free energy devices exist,But Elite controllers don't want ppl to be free from the costs of energy,Get the blueprints for a real Magnet motor free enegy machine at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Join the revolution!
lutherarao 1 year ago
I'll believe we's gonna make it when tv news say they found a replacement for oil based fertilizer that electric trailers and harvesting machine are being manufactured and that oil based medecines, polyestes for clothes, lubricants, inks,paints, ASPHALT, cosmetics, ANTISEPTICS and an tons of other stuff madefrom oil all got subtitutuion products.
Otherwise we can all kiss goodbye to ou way of life!
GeoffreyRahl 1 year ago
@GeoffreyRahl a lot of oil based products can be replaced by natural oil. That is of course a lot more expensive.
Napoleon501ste 1 year ago
Why continue with dirty energy when clean energy is so clear? Because the market has determined it's too expensive. The market will always win. Once fossil fuels become too expensive, then we will move to renewable resources. It's really quite simple- the market does work.
diggingforgold 1 year ago
@diggingforgold Switching too fast when the market suddenly demands it will cause very high energy prices. That is not something to look forward to and should be avoided.
Napoleon501ste 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WEC 2010 and their site energy2point0 is the place we all should be debating in order to get all stakeholders around a same community energy2point0 The only way to have a constructive debate... AND the big GUYS WILL LISTEN...
PaulYves64 1 year ago
electrons move through conductors not conduit, conductors are housed in conduit
DerrickB82 1 year ago
"Freeway for electrons". Actually electrons hardly move in an electrical conduit. It is the electric field which moves, similar to a wave in water.
SOLARTRADERdotCA 1 year ago
go to: conversationswithbucky dotcom
unitivity 1 year ago
This is GENI, which is a profit motive non profit to obtain what is really a part of world game started by bucky fuller. I do not think it should be renamed to obtain money. It should be kept whole in the world game that included this plan of a world system integration of radiation gathering and focus. At least now they admit where it came from. I suppose it is fair to rip off and at least it be looked at. But to keep it world game makes it united with the rest of the plan so that people see it.
unitivity 1 year ago
Renewable energy is a must.....there are so many sources. All we need to do is DO IT!!!!!! All it is about is the money. The politicos of the world do not care. We the people must get it on track. Cut are energy use , cut our water use. RECYCLE all you can. I can go on but you all know what to do...every little bit helps.
jasonottthetroll 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The big Oil corporations are trying their best to stop free energy ideas from spreading to common ppl.
We need to put an end to this corruption ,start generating ur own electricity now.
Visit LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and get the blueprints . Join the Revolution!!
offertorycardiacml 1 year ago
renewable energy is a joke... lots of pollution for not much energy...
The only answer is Fusion
VederchiHarry 1 year ago
@VederchiHarry the only answer is power saving. dont drive so often with your car use as little water as possible and build or buy a low energy house. we can save soooo much energy. than the renewable energy is enough for this planet. and you would wait for fusion ?? hm no no lets wait. 50 years later... people die because there is no food and no work. no no lets wait for fusion. you cannot wait for it. you have to change your way of life !
drumpfuscher 1 year ago
@drumpfuscher You are day dreaming! How long is it going to take for us to rebuild most of our houses and save a lot of power??? 50 years? We'll have Fusion by then! Do You know that the manufacturing of solar panels engenders a lot of pollution ! That the wind turbine kill lots of birds are ugly! Dams have a negative impact on nature and provoke earthquakes! ''Renewable enegy'' will never be sufficient enough to supply the people that dont have access to electricity!
VederchiHarry 1 year ago
@VederchiHarry yes i know that wind turbines kills birds but do you know how many lives oil and gas kost. we dont have the time to wait for fusion. we cannot say. "oh doesnt matter oil is running out because fusion will come in the future!" and waiste energy. the only thing i want to say is that we have to save energy. and i dont think this is day dreaming. i work as a solarpanel intallateur and electric car seller ok. i know what i am talking about. and humans are the negative impact on nature
drumpfuscher 1 year ago
@VederchiHarry and you can start to save energy NOW. with every little thing. with energy saving bulbs and travelcommunitys. and eat more vegetables and not meat. buy electric cars. isolate your house. in germany theese things are normal. its not that hard but it has a big effect. so i would say you are daydreaming if you are sitting at home and wait for change. You have to change the future of your kids. i dont want to start a fight
drumpfuscher 1 year ago
@drumpfuscher Arguing is not fighting! never heard of democracy? My point is that renewable energy will never be sufficient! Since You are working with solar pannels calculate the area needed to provide 50% of today's world energy (including transport)! And dont use the max power that You can get at midday!
Even if we save a lot of power, the poor will never have access to energy!
Finally... I have a very bad news for You. Until will master Fusion... Our main source of energy will be... COAL!
VederchiHarry 1 year ago
@VederchiHarry but when will fusion be reality and if it works when will we be able to use it. and how long will it take to build thoose electric station. even if it will come in the future. it will take loooong time to use it. and even if coal would be the main source of energy we have to save energy ! and yes there are many people who never have acces to power but this is now and will be in the future.
drumpfuscher 1 year ago
@drumpfuscher check the website ''ITER''. The fusion reactor will be finished by 2020 and will produce 500MgW for 50MgW used.By 2040 they will start to produce industrial electricity on a significant scale. By the end of this century, FUSION will replace most of the other energy production.
FUSION is the power of the SUN! There is no pollution and Hydrogen is an inexhaustible ressource (since You can get it from water)
By the way, the real water problem is not so much quantity, but quality!
VederchiHarry 1 year ago
@VederchiHarry I have high hopes for fusion power, but not tokamaks.
D-D fusion looks barely workable in a tokamak. If tokamaks ever become a viable power source they will run on D-T fusion for a very long time; and they will probably use a fission blanket(which could melt down from decay heat in a LOCA)
Lithium is not all that abundant, which is the fuel these reactors will chew through. Sustainable for millions of years, like uranium and thorium breeders, but not indefinitely.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
Illuminati invented the "energy crisis." They just made it up for money.
cky12qxz 1 year ago
Water is NOT a commodity!
Sophisima 1 year ago
WATCH 6 AM !! report in CHULA university
bushbank 1 year ago
Wind, solar, and bio are a recipe for disaster. Wind and Solar are Expensive and Unreliable. We need cheap and Reliable energy.
The answer is the "Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor" LFTR.. We have enough thorium to last thousands of years. Please google Thorium Energy.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
@bigpchamber its not fucking expensive, youre just a moron.
Phi16180 1 year ago
@Phi16180 That sure convinced me. Have fun in fantasy land.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
@bigpchamber good luck with your luquid fluoride thorium reactor plan
Phi16180 1 year ago
@Phi16180 Thank you! On the chance you are a rare environmentalist with an open mind, you ought to read up on LFTs - By far the most environmentally friendly form of energy we can create.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I invented a breakthrough energy source that contradicts the law of energy conservation. I have a PROOF that there are electrodynamic phenomena that contradict the law of energy conservation. I am looking for $300 000 for a prototype and for $3M for patents. Making a 6 kW generator will cost $1200 in mass production, value of energy produced yearly $5400.
H. Tomasz Grzybowski
tel. +48-512-933-540
henrykay01 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@henrykay
Can't see y any1 here wld tag this "spam;" it cld b the most important post ever on YouTube! It cld change the whole course of history!
I must get in on the "ground floor." Though I don't have $300k in liquid assets, I can hook u up w/ a reliable, near-limitless capital source.
I'm great friends w/the widow of Nigeria's late Pres Sani Abacha, & am helping her 2 access the $100million only now w/ a security co. Send me yr e-mail address, and let's make history 2gether!
(& mega$ too!)
smartalek1 1 year ago
@foringjar612.. I can't deny that there are no significant costs for the adoption of windturbines as you say. Wind cannot be the dominant form of energy production, but will be part of the solution. So despite the costs, I still do believe that a 'combination' of several renewable energysources could be used in a succesfull way for generating electricty. I didn't say that oil can be replaced easily, but we can save oil on the longterm with renewable energy investments nowadays. So far!
ScoutWout 1 year ago
hydrate?
mike121223 1 year ago
We have these turbines all over my state. 200 are visable from my house. All of this energy is sent 800 miles to calif. This talk of renewable energy is great with the pretty pictures and 60's music. But until it's available to all of us, not just the money people, it's another administration in control with big business. Instead of oil, it's wind. The inconveinent truth is...here are all these windmills and we are still using coal for electricity. Glad our governor didn't become president.
Rikenrocker 1 year ago
Comment removed
Rikenrocker 1 year ago
No, you dont understand, oil, transports food and makes plasic... and things that we call modern....like computers, steel, rubber and cars.
Renewables cannot do that..... finite reserves = finite things u can make from them which still means that theres a good chance that these rnewables have come to late.
check out Michael Ruppert doc "Collapse"
TellinTheTruth 1 year ago
Why not have wireless electricity like Tesla say ?
dan020350 1 year ago
Dont forget, that peoples minds need to change, and that all these "clean energies" will not supply even a mediocre percentage of energy needs.
Watch the videos on utube:
Endgame, invisible empire, truth and lies of 9/11, collapse.
6 billion people and only limited reources. Prior to the oil/coal discoveries there were localised industry and people had land to grow there own food. Now that has reversed and people live in concrete cities with limited areas to grow food.
TellinTheTruth 1 year ago
yes agreeable, but the western world still uses about 70 - 80% of the resources.
now that a population dense china, india are coming into the need for oil products, we will see a population explosion and demand will outstrip supply of resources, Namely OIL. from this point, prices will skyrocket and the dollar will be devalued from the banking bailouts...... leading to a collapse.
from here countries will enforce draconian laws to control the population, if u havnt died already
TellinTheTruth 1 year ago
to tell you the truth, renewable energy sources are free to use. Free energy doesn't exist, but free sources do. Sources like wind, solar and hydro will play (and are already playing) a major role, especially in the developing countries like India and China. It's not just wind or solar which will make the difference, but it'll be mixture of all kind of renewable energy sources.
Did you know why the use of solar energy has not been opened up yet? Because the oil industry does not own the sun!
ScoutWout 1 year ago
@ScoutWout If solar energy is a free source of energy, then so is oil. All you have to do is dig it out of the ground(or alternately make it from CO2 and water, using some other free energy source).
Water contains enough deuterium that if fused to helium-4 in 2 steps it contains ~100 times the energy of an equivalent amount of oil. You just have to build a fusion reactor.
Solar is an unsustainable piece of crap despite a century of fawning adulation; doesn't look set to change.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb well there is solar - also solar thermal - also geo thermal- wind- tide ocean current- hydro- advanced fuel cells like the bloom box - also new nano antenna that covert infra red to electricity - pressure transducers( can be put anywhere anything moves including buildings) - and other forms of clean energy and more being developed
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy Solar PV, solar thermal and wind are currently at best a way to save a little bit of fuel at dirt burners(or fossil fuel plants as you might like to call them). What is required to take them from token energy sources, mostly use to greenwash natural gas, to something that could really power the grid is crushingly expensive and dangerous both politically and otherwise.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb politicaly dangerous ? other wise? expensive? - they are only expensive in money and we may not ever have the " money" - but we do have the know how the resources and the desire to use and develope them - just the need for profit to do anything is a hindrance - abundant clean energy would not yield aprofit - abundance like say oxegen in the atmosphere is not profitable - as morgan said when stopping tesslas wireless electrcity - where do we put the meter?
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy Yes. Politically dangerous.
There will never be a utopia where we are all friends and sing kumbayah. That powerline is also a weapon, just like oil is a weapon.
You recreate the politics of oil, where we go in and bomb people into submission and install tyrants who keep the oil flowing; but this time you do it with solar farms and to protect power lines instead.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb so abundant sustainable free use energy is more politicaly dangerous than our current and increasing resource wars?
MrIzzyDizzy 1 month ago
@MrIzzyDizzy The definition of sustainable is being able to supply the needs of today without comprimising the needs of tomorrow. Unreliables cannot supply the needs of today; there's this massive piece of the puzzle missing; hence world-spanning electrical grids, V2G and other rube goldberg machines to try and deal with the flaws.
Currently only oil is a major geopolitical problem. You're advocating making the entire energy supply the same kind of geopolitical problem.
soylentgreenb 1 month ago
@soylentgreenb
Wow, you really know NOTHING about energy. One of the great advantages of renewables is that EVERYONE can have a power plant in his backyard or on his roof, be it wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, etc. It is decentral and democratic. Not everyone sits on oil. You are unable to grasp simple facts.
trakkaton 1 month ago