if solar panels and wind turbines could be designed in a way that would not be so inconsistent with the buildings design and architecture,possibly they would be more widely used.
What are you on about? if your going to say that an important video like this is just "lies", at least back it up if you want people to actually listen to what ure saying.
Hey, check out my website at ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com and get all the new and improved Equipments to build or buy your own solar panels and wind energy turbine systems ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com is a website that sells the most modern environmental products available
Only with Iter we (MAYBE) could achieve net power output. After that, obtain electricity from nuclear fusion need other 20-30 years, because you need to find a way to heat the weater! Really this is not the way to resolve climate warming before the 2050!
This is true, but the problem is in the configuration of the reactor. If you use (need) superconductor, then you need T=-270 C, and also the nuclear fusion give a lot of heat. The question is: Where I can put the water?
p.s
I'm a massive fan of nuclear fusion, I'm at University and I'm studying nuclear fusion. I'm sure that nuclear fusion is the way to resolve all of energy problems, but needs time...
@Burningplasma Imagine an AI technological innovation throwing away of all the previous rules, perhaps in the blink of an eye, an exponential runaway beyond any hope of control. Developments that before were thought might only happen in "a million years" (if ever) happening within the next century.
Nature liberates He, O and gamam waves where it does molecular nuclear fusion - which is in all life on Earth. Water fall; breaking waves, the steam cycle - and you beating heart.
In was colder in the UK, India, Kenya, Moritious, California, and the CAnaries. Last time I looked, they were in the world! No where is now warmer! We are into the next ice age.
Nuclear Power invented the phantom sciecne of Global WArming. THe wordl is cooling now, so why is Greenpeace still doing nuclear PR? Do they pay well?
Plants take in relatively tiny amounts compared to the masses of co2 emmissions that we create.
In the long run (over millions of years) plants will eventually fossilise and rebalance it out, but this take (as previously stated) MILLIONS OF YEARS. Climate change has to do with the next few HUNDRED years. Your argumant is completely scientifically flawed.
If you would have been paying more attention in the past 3 years, as we have learnt more about the situation scientists have stopped refering to the issue as global warming. The issue we face is "Global Climate Destabalisation".
The science behind Global Climate Destabalisation is supported by two of the worlds largest and most respected scientific communities (NAS And AAAS)
I have done my reasearch, either do yours or stop pretending like you have the faintest clue about whats happening.
I did a PhD in this stuff, and found out how to do nuclear fusion: Power with no CO2, and no possiblity of man made 'climate change' which was PR ficitino from nuclear power. Put about by PAID stooges.
Just listing a bunch of countries and saying that it hasnt been colder in 20 years doesnt prove that the world's climate is cooling. I dont even know how you can support that "the world is cooling" when ice caps are shrinking at ridiculose rates... Again, i restate that the top scientists are talking about global climate destabalisation - NOT GLOBAL WARMING OR COOLING. If your in denial - okay; but please dont try and convince others they're wrong because your just making a fool of yourself.
I like this way of thinking. There's another element that must be added to really make it work - consolidation of industry. Instead of having hundreds of needless choices of everything, we could standarddize. Instead of shipping 250 1 gal bottles of soap, for instance, we ship a 250 gal tote and people come with refillable bottles. Enormous potential for reduction of energy is avaiable by doing this across the board. The only thing stopping us is money. See my videos esp. part II.
They also duck the fact that the ground produces heat naturally. (see volcanic research)
The only reason volcanic power is not common place is because narrow minded people run the show. Consider that we don't need power lines at all. In a society that depends on energy it is counterproductive to hinder free energy. Free energy would liberate mankind.
CO2 is not good for the environment but it is not a cause for global warming, it is the sun circles, Pluto is geting also hot. Politicians are useing "global warming excuse" to control us even more & to take our rights away in order to save us from ourselves.
Excellent! Brillant... please share this and send it to everyone you know... send by email, send it to your Councillors... send it to your MP... send it to your MEP!
The earth is changing everyday, it has been much warmer than it is now and it has been colder. This is a natural occurrence. I do not believe we need to be arguing if we are causing climate change. Spend the money and resources on finding not only cleaner but cheaper and sustainable forms of energy. I believe there are already answers to most of these energy needs but the financial interests of Business and Government will not allow it. They do not want energy sources they can't control.
your right, and i want CHEAP energy, renewable energy is VERY CHEAP and stable. we need to support Green Collar jobs in USA, especially in our beginning stages of a recession.
Business and Government don't want energy sources they can't control? How could they not control ANY energy source? And why would they not want to expand their power into these other power methods? Paranoia indeed.
The reason why these green technologies aren't abundantly found is very simple: THEY DON'T WORK WELL ENOUGH TO POWER THE WORLD.
The push for green solutions only is distracting us from our only true solution: Nuclear Fusion.
No, the only true solution is population reduction. That is the only way we can use less resources. Even if we cut usage 50%, all those gains are wiped out when the population grows another 50%.
And Nuclear Fusion does not 'run out'. I don't even know what you mean by that.
Nuclear fusion does not run out. It's primary source of fuel is water. We have oceans full and if we "run out" of that we are done for anyway ! The source is recycled back to the same water we started with.
Less than the amount you emit from your every orifice each day I'm betting. Additionally, this video doesn't even scratch the surface of modern technology and renewable energies. Solar and wind are the future as well as magnetic motor technology. It's only a matter of time but the technology is and has been with us since the early 90's. Why I wonder are there so many skeptics... hmmm.
We'll always need to build new buildings and housing (they don't last forever) so why not spend a little more money in everything we are going to build that will pay for itself in the few years following. If you don't care about temp. rising then surely you want to save money and spend less on fuels that are finite, which by there nature must go up in price.
Congratulations on a clear and well presented video. I absolutely agree that the easiest way forward is to stop wasting energy. There is a big push for heat pumps here in Ireland, but heat pumps are only an efficient way of heating your house with electricity. If the heat pump is 300% efficient, it is only offsetting the 33% efficiency of the power plants. You might as well keep your oil boiler! Heat pumps only make sense when we can generate electricity more efficiently.
Please post your question as a video response to our video and your question might be answered by the World Energy Congress leaders. thanks! Our video is: Ask your question to the World Energy Congress delegates.
Sorry for the delay in replying. My point is the media constantly bombards us with jingo's, the war to end all wars is a prime example of how hollow they are! All this media attention only centralizes power in govt. Research historical co2 levels, the earth experienced an ice age when co2 was 11 times its present level. Adage "scepticism and mistrust are the parents of security"
PS. I don't care I'm still scared shitless about the war to end all wars, the yellow peril, reds under the bed, the domino effect, impending ice age(1970;s), y2k, terrorism, WMD, nuclear Iran and all those other media promoted fears!
With such a paranoid yet apathetic attitude as that, nothing useful would ever get done. It's fairly evident that the world IS heating up and regardless of whether it is us doing so, the more energy we can conserve the better!
Would it be better if the world were cooling? Paranoid? It is a simple fact that, the slogans I mentioned were all false. flaze3 you use the term 'we' does this mean as individuals, if so, I agree. However if you mean as central planning socialism I disagree, a casual observation of history shows this an inevitable failure. If you disagree with me, present facts and logical reasoned argument!
'central planning socialism'?! I never meant THAT at any rate. By 'we' I mean people at large, individually, and those responsible for the production of power as shown in this video.
flaze3, I am not suggesting that you or the people who produced the video are not genuine. All I ask is that the material shown is critically & logically analysed. Please watch the video again, see if you can spot any central planning, but first, google 'opportunity cost' and 'economy of scale'.
I'm arguing that central planning & command economies have always failed, and, that centralised financial control leads to the destruction of wealth, freedom, liberty & life. Can you place a value on these things?
Assume? financial control failed in soviet russia mao's china nth korea & cuba. can you provide substantive fact that state control produces positive values? Quantitative & qualitative?
Why must I? It is YOU who is objecting to what seems to be to be a useful and productive idea. You fling around these terms and I am increasingly unconvinced by you.
You don't, it is YOU who used the term paranoid! "Seems to be?" All I have done is question the ideas presented, regrettably with sarcasm. Logic, if central planning fails on a large scale, why would it work on a smaller scale?
I don't get it! How can co2 inside the greenhouse be different from the co2 outside? Do they change the laws of chemistry? Obviously the forests don't deserve the essential trace elements! Oh, now I get it, encourage more laws and regulations, that worked so well in the soviet union command economy. Can't have individuals with freedom of choice can we now!
It looks to me like some countries fight these solutions tooth and nail because making a quick buck (lots of) is easier the old way. And to hell with the future...
This video is highly relevant to the OU T307 course. I will post a link to the course team, but it would be really helpful if it was tagged / searchable from the terms CHP, Woking, Microgeneration and Renewable.
My name is Jaime Heras. I'm 14 years old. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I have no face. When you look at me you'll die immediately. You have 900seconds to repost this or I will visit you tonight.
Repost this ''12.''' dgxxx
Copy and past this to 10 vedo or you mum will die within the next 4 hours.......
Thank you for this well thought out doco, very inspirational.
We also have similar problems in New Zealand (my home). There are severe legislative problems preventing the uptake of small scale distributed energy. I'd like to make a mashup of your video re-using the european content - but targeting it at the issues New Zealand faces. Would you be willing to provide me with the content, or at least allow me to reproduce the content from your video?
WaterFurnace Channel: What about what the EPA called the "most energy efficient, environmentally clean, and cost-effective" systems available? Geothermal heat pumps burn no fossil fuels, are 5 times more efficient than gas furnaces, and reduce utility bills up to 70%.
It's equal to planting 750 trees or taking 2 cars off the road...forever. If 10% of California goes geo, the energy saved equals the output of 9 power plants! Geo could have a huge impact on the environment and dependence on oil.
Want Free electronic follow these steps: 1. go to xpango(dot)com 2. Click sign up now at the top of the page 3. fill in the required blanks, and enter the REFERAL ID as the numbers: 90597430 3.5 Use a valid email, they will send an activation code 4. Click Register 5. Check your email, click the link to activate the account 6. Go back to xpango(dot)com 7.Activate account 8. complete some free offers for credits 9. Enjoy the 360 or Iphone IMPORTANT! MAKE SURE TO USE THE REFFERAL ID: 90597430
Tesla! You're alive. JP Morgan (the actual Morgan Chase Manhattan) undertake your purposal to keep your invention in the Global Elite's Hands. Due to their control of "education", your name disappeared from mankind's memory and curiosity.
But now Consciousness is high through out the World.
Find out "Nikola Tesla's Secret" film on p2p. Everyone must know the "sliding doors" effect going back to 1906, when the ILLUMINATI decided our Planet and Our future.
A while back there was a lot of debate here on whether nuclear power is the answer - we've just made a new short film on that (it covers efficiency, renewables and combined heat and power as well as nuclear). It's called The Convenient Solution - check my latest videos to see it.
The sad thing is that even with a 100% renewable powered community, we still have a bit of a problem. How does the community get built? Where does all that energy come from? The steel, the concrete, the wood, the copper, the plastic, the blades, the photovoltaics, etc. Oil... that is why we can never say anything is 100% renewable. We'll be lucky to get to 50% before the other 50% runs out.
You're confusing a fixed cost with recurring cost. Yes, it takes oil to build the community, if for nothing else the lubrication the power tools need. But it's used only ONCE in the construction, and is amortized over time. If you have inefficient power grids, you pay the inefficiency tax for as long as it is in operation. Do the math!
Good God, these are intelligent men of science, not economy...
The government would do a shoddy job of handling this; it could step aside and perhaps allow for less red tape, but competition is the only way to ensure success. I don't know about the UK's government, but no matter how many flaws I find in the US, capitalism is the only way to go in a "democracy." However, someone save me from my ignorance: how does the UK like capitalist socialism in general?
global warming is invevitable. some where on earth there is a HUGE reserver of methane gas( cant remember were). the gas is already leaking for the bottom of the ocean and some time in the future all of the gas will be released into the air. theres no way in stopping it but we could slow it down by not using so much fucking fossil fuels ( especially USA[btw i live there])
"Global Warming" is bullshit. The planet has had "global warming" since the beginning. There are such things as the Ice Age and the Meltdown. Volanoes harm the atmosphere more than technology does. This is just another attempt at conflict within society. The smarter we become, the dumber we are.
yeah dumbasss but we're making it worst and volcanoes don't make it worst... CO2 has increased dramatically after the Industrial Revultion don't be a hypocrate and ignore the fact that we have a god damn issue at hand... imbecil...
You're the imbecile. It's the planet's natural course. This is how it revitalizes itself. Do you realize how much feces attribute to the damaging of the atmosphere as well? And back then when mammals were large, that's a lot. Not to mention there were more fucking active volcanoes, which exceeded the amount of how nuclear technology. Use common sense, dickhead.
You mentioned volcanoes... plus don't you dare deny that CO2 injection into the enviroment isn't changing the god damn nature of earth... it's not a natural course if the glaciers that have been there for billions of year on the antarctic suddenly start vanishing because of the species that has been here for the least ammount of time start pounding on earth!
You are wrong. They haven't been there for billions of years. We are still in our meltdown from our last Ice Age. Before anything was anything, this entire planet was made up of gasses produced by volanoes. The entire world was full of molten rock, lava, and gasses. Billions of years ago. The planet was actually an entire tropical planet, with zero ice.
God damn it you idiot.. the damn ice age was a critical change of temperature like 4 degree Celcius change! that's it... it's nothing too critical like the stupid little movie you're getting your information from, Ice Age. ALL scientist agree that global warming is a true fact... there has never been a reported when a scientist has said that Global Warming wasn't true... you better be a freaking Einstein or you're like 500 in 6 billion
ANY change in ANY temperature can be enough to accelerate ANYTHING. Are you aware of how the universe was even created? A small fraction of something like 0.00000085 would have caused the universe to NOT be created. When it was created, it was the size of a pin head. Imagine that. The smallest fraction can cause an ENORMOUS IMPACT over time. It is a cycle and recycle. And I am a fucking Einstein. Something scientists gain is intelligence, they lack wisdom and common sense.
A loser in a debate always resorts to insults, when the battle is lost. Take care of yourself and know that you add to the growing conflict and you'll be one of the many that cause turmoil and civil unrest in life.
What is proof? Proof is convincing someone that something is real. Persuasion is when someone is convinced without a doubt that something is real. Does that mean if I convince someone that reality is fiction, I have proven myself right?
My self-interest is to convince the people of the world that not all things are real. Finally, convincing society to follow my beliefs, leading to a world-wide revolution.
yes. its about social conscience.cus now, once again, it is the poorest part of the world who dies first. although its our part of the world who's done this... crap isnt it? recycle, and do it for the ilves of smal kids. and everybody else..
Super2ner, you're right. But nuclear power is something that we haven't mastered yet. There are some elements in this world that stay radioactive for thousands of years, where and how do you discard these elements. Even though 500g of Uranium can produce 30 000 kwh, there are still more cons than pros with this method of energy. Remember the incident in Russia?
why you ask... It's all about payoffs or "gifts" to politicians. Medical doctors are also guilty, if a drug company gives very nice gifts then that is the drug he pushes to his patients. Virtually everyone can be bought. Oil companies pay off and even will kill those that threaten their lively hood. What would you do to protect your multi trillion dollar business from topling to the ground?
Decentralization can completely change the way we use energy in the western world, and make it cheaper, its not the answer as it would probably use unsustainable natural gas fuel. The answer, is a mix of different renewable technologies
U R ALL FREAKING NERDS!!!! EVERYONE WHO COMMITED!(exsept me :o)ESPECIALY THE ONE WHO MADE IT! I TYPED INTRESTING IN AND IT BROUGHT UP THIS!?!?!?! U SUCK!
ALSO IM REPORTING THIS JUST SO OTHERS WONT BE BORED!
The 1600 MWe European Pressurized Reactor reactor is being built in Olkiluoto, Finland. A joint effort of French AREVA and German Siemens AG, it will be the largest reactor in the world.
global Warming started at the end of the last ice age, so we are not entirely responsible, its just the media that portray this,, however we MUST take steps to slow the process down to preserve our civiilisation, SCRAP NUKES (weapons and energy generation) switch to anti-gravity, hydrogen, solar, wind and hydro power generation, stop sucking the earth dry of oil, legalise industrial hemp farming
Let me correct you, I live in denmark, and you get a bear allright, but you have to pay for at least 5. I am allmost sure that energy is about 3times more expencive in denmark than in the uk!
we use lots of power to mine it, it would be located far away from the stations becaue the uranium is in the middle of Australia; which means trucks would have to transport it many kilometres emitting massive amounts of CO2. In addition, we have no idea how to deposit of the waste! It is not the answer...renewables all the way
I believe a small fire log sized fuel rod is equivalent to 400 tons of coal, and the fuel used by a CANDU reactor uses only about 3% or so enriched uranium that would emit the same background radiation from the mine it came from after only 500 years, not 100,000 years, can any body out there confirm this.
Of course nuclear has its advantages...it is extremely efficient, i can't remember the rate of efficiency juxtaposed with the efficiency of coal. But we will run out of it
Nuclear plants are actually less economical than coal plants on a financial basis. Solar and wind power are two of the fastest growing segments of the economy and they are actually more reliable than large centralized systems. Having solar cells spread over a community means that a downed powerline across town won't turn off your lights.
solar cells and wind power do not work everwhere,you need the perfect location,but they should be utilized where current technology permits, nuclear energy can be used everwhere, although to use nuclear energy to refine tar sand oil is self defeating
Nuclear is NOT the answer. It uses massive amounts of water (not a good idea here in Australia where we have the worst drought ever), it is a nonrenewable (estimated in Australia as only 100 years worth if we switch to nuclear)...
How funny was the guy from the Netherlands! Notice how many people where cycling! It's amazing! One, it takes cars off the road and two we are combatting the obesity crisis. We live leaky, ineffitient lives and need to change that
Seems to me like a good idea - cut out the wasted energy in our old system and we don't need as much, right?? So wind and hydro can be the solution too.
No mention on weather woking concil saved money after their invest in decentralised power, it probably wont pay for itself for another 100 years! in the end cost is what will determin the sucsess of these shcemes
This video conveniently fails to tell you all about the technical aspects of such of decentralised energy systems. What Greenpeace suggest here is 100% correct, BUT there is no way we can have a fully decentralised generation system in the specified time frame. In the UK all our present power stations will be at the end of their working life very soon. There is only one near term solution. Nuclear Power! Unfortunately Greenpeace protest this. So, in other words...
"Absorb/Release ..." yes that is true but the point here is that transporting the energy is inefficient. Electrical wires all have a resistance and that causes heat energy to be lost along the length of the cable.. I did not know it was 2/3 s that was lost. 100% efficiency is impossible.
Well, yeah -- everyone knows that biomass released CO2 when burned. But it is neutral in that it absorbs about the same amount of CO2 before that when it is still green and growing. See? Absorb/Release Absorb/Release etc. Duh.
nuclear power plants don't reject global warming gas !
..but oh yes it does, it's water. very dangerous. DAMN FUCKING OIL AND PESTICIDEs(its not about warming..but destroying life itself..in the ground, water, animals vegtals..and human) look, when did cancer came?
One of the troubles with CHP is that many of them use paper waste to burn, which comes from households and business surrounding the CHP plants. Residents, who supply the paper products, believe that it is for recycling, they are never told that the paper is burnt in the CHP plants. The question we should be asking should we recycle our paper to save our trees or burn it and cut down more trees to be burnt in CHP plants!
Why don't we use solar power, wind or wave power, which comes free?
One of the troubles with CHP is that many of them use paper waste to burn, which comes from households and business surrounding the CHP plants. Residents, who supply the paper products, believe that it is for recycling, they are never told that the paper is burnt in the CHP plants. The question we should be asking should we recycle our paper to save our trees or burn it and cut down more trees to be burnt in CHP plants!
Why don't we use solar power, wind or wave power, which comes free?
One thing I really like about this video is that is shows so clearly how more-efficient and alternative technologies are NOT "pie-in-the-sky" dreams of spaced out hippies, but are already a reality in parts of Europe.
A very apt solution (or at least a significant part of the solution) -- this decentralization. The quickest way that everyone will go for it is when either the gov't is forced, due to shortages, to mandate rationing, or a true "free market, level playing field" political reality is realized -- that is, a market without the current obscene subsidies to nuclear, coal, oil etc. that distort everything.
blaablabla, everybody knows how to handle, but just do it then. turn off your PC, tv and radio when you don't use them!
Greenpeace is really short-sighted. Just build hundreds of nuclear plants so energy problem ánd CO2 problems will be gone. Just dump the nuclear stuff protected underground.
wind power is relatively inexpensive and can be manufactured very quick producing power for under 10 cents a kilowatt in large wind farms. The problem is that you need the perfect location to make them viable, so they can't replace all coal fired electric stations, just some of them.
If wind power is so brilliant, why don't Greenpeace set up their own wind power company and make a zillion pounds from building windmills? Because they're full of shit that's why.
the cost of not reaching a consensus to use nuclear energy is even more pollution. It is the only clean option available to replace 1000 coal fired plants. Striving to reduce energy consumption is only part of the equation, trying to convince 6 billion people that they have to change their lifestyles will be harder than accepting nuclear energy.
getting a consensus to actually go with decentralizing is probably more difficult than getting a consensus to go nuclear, nuclear energy will give a bigger bang for the buck in replacing coal fired electric plants and entering a hydrogen economy, we still need clean electricty to make lots of hydrogen or to charge electric cars
The cost of building nuclear plants is huge & there is still the problem of what to do with the highly toxic waste. Do we really want to bury it for our grandchildren to have to deal with? Is that how we work, make a big mess now and leave someone else to clean it up? We have just a couple of years to sort our CO2 emmissions before it is too late to stop climate chaos, even if nuclear was clean there is no way the plants would be built and operational in time to make a difference.
Thank you! That's exactly why nuclear is not the right decision! We would be slightly combatting the climate change crisis, but burdening our grandchildren with toxic waste
i am leaning towards the use of nuclear energy as our solution to the kyoto agreement.Solar technolgy is to expensive, we are out of hydro sites, tidal and wave power is local, coal oil and gas are too dirty, geothermal technology is limited ,not enough viable locations for all the wind power we would require .we can build wind generation stations to fill the gap in the short term. nuclear is the only quick fix to our global warming problem.
Have you seen 'what are we waiting for?'. Try a search for decentralised energy and take a look at the vid, I'm sure it will give you a new perspective.
The logistics of getting everyone to agree to the concept of decentralized energy will be more difficult than the actual transition. nuclear is a better bang for the buck, although decentralizing could be part of plan
It's depressing how old this video is. We still haven't made the appropriate moves.
This video is fantastic though, thank you very much!
Chorltonian 1 year ago
if solar panels and wind turbines could be designed in a way that would not be so inconsistent with the buildings design and architecture,possibly they would be more widely used.
AminHi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice,.,.But Check Out My Channel,..,Nicely Wwell Put Entertainment!!
Josh18R 1 year ago
lies lies lies
Britlandish 2 years ago
"lies lies lies" ???
What are you on about? if your going to say that an important video like this is just "lies", at least back it up if you want people to actually listen to what ure saying.
For the time being ill ignore you.
todioliver 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey, check out my website at ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com and get all the new and improved Equipments to build or buy your own solar panels and wind energy turbine systems ScientificallyGreener(Dot) com is a website that sells the most modern environmental products available
scientificallygreene 2 years ago
Clive Anderson? XD
yootoobnewbie 2 years ago
we must do something. we need more energy but not like this way... make a brand new kinds of energy... come on we can do something...
indistro 2 years ago
Ja idd we kunnen wel iets.
M2tw1992 2 years ago
A H plasma deos nuclear fusion on Earth, today: Power with no CO2.
JonThm 2 years ago
Maybe in the 2050...
Burningplasma 1 year ago
@Burningplasma Nature fixed GW in 1995: As it was only ever ficiton from nuclear power.
JonThm 1 year ago
Only with Iter we (MAYBE) could achieve net power output. After that, obtain electricity from nuclear fusion need other 20-30 years, because you need to find a way to heat the weater! Really this is not the way to resolve climate warming before the 2050!
Burningplasma 1 year ago
@Burningplasma Ns plasmas give out gamma waves, heat and produce C. Hot smokers give out energy, He and O, as they do MNF today. So exothermic!
JonThm 1 year ago
This is true, but the problem is in the configuration of the reactor. If you use (need) superconductor, then you need T=-270 C, and also the nuclear fusion give a lot of heat. The question is: Where I can put the water?
p.s
I'm a massive fan of nuclear fusion, I'm at University and I'm studying nuclear fusion. I'm sure that nuclear fusion is the way to resolve all of energy problems, but needs time...
Burningplasma 1 year ago
@Burningplasma Molecular nuclear fusion goes off in the seas from regular water at 3 C. Your beating heart also does it
JonThm 1 year ago
@Burningplasma Imagine an AI technological innovation throwing away of all the previous rules, perhaps in the blink of an eye, an exponential runaway beyond any hope of control. Developments that before were thought might only happen in "a million years" (if ever) happening within the next century.
bryanmessina 1 year ago
What's Try-Generation?
SONBoomer 2 years ago
Rusi T wants large steam bubbles, with microwaves. To do molecular nuclear fusion.
JonThm 2 years ago
what are we waiting for? Sanjan eating again?
hwangson 2 years ago
Stop use the fossils period. This solution is shit.
Anothercoilgun 2 years ago
On my blog I tell you how to do nuclear fusion from water: Safe, clean cheap power, with no CO2 or toxic death!
JonThm 2 years ago
wat ya gona do when alle the water is gone :?
Jack243 2 years ago
The water goes to He and O. We lose the He to space, gain H, and at lightening strikes today get our water back. So nature gives us our water back.
JonThm 2 years ago
What? Helium? WHAT?????
okrawhite 2 years ago
Nature liberates He, O and gamam waves where it does molecular nuclear fusion - which is in all life on Earth. Water fall; breaking waves, the steam cycle - and you beating heart.
JonThm 2 years ago
New scientist Oct 2nd 2008: The world climate has been cooling from 2005.
JonThm 2 years ago
global warming hasnt been happening since 1996
Habs1009 2 years ago
In was colder in the UK, India, Kenya, Moritious, California, and the CAnaries. Last time I looked, they were in the world! No where is now warmer! We are into the next ice age.
JonThm 2 years ago
(my last comments were in reply to jonThm)
todioliver 2 years ago
Nuclear Power invented the phantom sciecne of Global WArming. THe wordl is cooling now, so why is Greenpeace still doing nuclear PR? Do they pay well?
JonThm 3 years ago
shut up and face facts please!
Pollyoffhertrolley 2 years ago
The world started cooling in 2005: Plants take in all our CO2, so burning fossil feuls has expanded life on Earth.
JonThm 2 years ago
Plants take in relatively tiny amounts compared to the masses of co2 emmissions that we create.
In the long run (over millions of years) plants will eventually fossilise and rebalance it out, but this take (as previously stated) MILLIONS OF YEARS. Climate change has to do with the next few HUNDRED years. Your argumant is completely scientifically flawed.
todioliver 2 years ago
If you would have been paying more attention in the past 3 years, as we have learnt more about the situation scientists have stopped refering to the issue as global warming. The issue we face is "Global Climate Destabalisation".
The science behind Global Climate Destabalisation is supported by two of the worlds largest and most respected scientific communities (NAS And AAAS)
I have done my reasearch, either do yours or stop pretending like you have the faintest clue about whats happening.
todioliver 2 years ago
I did a PhD in this stuff, and found out how to do nuclear fusion: Power with no CO2, and no possiblity of man made 'climate change' which was PR ficitino from nuclear power. Put about by PAID stooges.
JonThm 2 years ago
rusi taleyarkhan already tried nuclear fusion. its not working yet.
HolySpringRolls 2 years ago
THe US military have gt cold fusion working: So, yes, fusion does work on Earth!
JonThm 2 years ago
Yup, the key is: use it POSITIVELY...
SONBoomer 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ja vind ik ook.
M2tw1992 2 years ago
The worst winter in the UK fro 20 years. Colder in India, Hong Kong, California ... This si Globla Cooling. Go outside, see! Do reality for me OK!
JonThm 2 years ago
Just listing a bunch of countries and saying that it hasnt been colder in 20 years doesnt prove that the world's climate is cooling. I dont even know how you can support that "the world is cooling" when ice caps are shrinking at ridiculose rates... Again, i restate that the top scientists are talking about global climate destabalisation - NOT GLOBAL WARMING OR COOLING. If your in denial - okay; but please dont try and convince others they're wrong because your just making a fool of yourself.
todioliver 2 years ago
Soetwas wird doch von der Energie-Lobby total unterdrückt! - Woher sollten die denn sonst ihre Milliardengewinne einschieben????
lungard 3 years ago
I like this way of thinking. There's another element that must be added to really make it work - consolidation of industry. Instead of having hundreds of needless choices of everything, we could standarddize. Instead of shipping 250 1 gal bottles of soap, for instance, we ship a 250 gal tote and people come with refillable bottles. Enormous potential for reduction of energy is avaiable by doing this across the board. The only thing stopping us is money. See my videos esp. part II.
BackwardsBound 3 years ago
They also duck the fact that the ground produces heat naturally. (see volcanic research)
The only reason volcanic power is not common place is because narrow minded people run the show. Consider that we don't need power lines at all. In a society that depends on energy it is counterproductive to hinder free energy. Free energy would liberate mankind.
Neiko410 3 years ago
CO2 is not good for the environment but it is not a cause for global warming, it is the sun circles, Pluto is geting also hot. Politicians are useing "global warming excuse" to control us even more & to take our rights away in order to save us from ourselves.
borcer 3 years ago
Comment removed
Pollyoffhertrolley 2 years ago
Excellent! Brillant... please share this and send it to everyone you know... send by email, send it to your Councillors... send it to your MP... send it to your MEP!
Make your representatives sit up and take notice!
ejbh3160 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
GLOBAL WARMING DOES NOT EXSIST!!
Call me crazy, but this happened fifty years ago. look it up. we thought the same thing and it proved false.
thirty years ago, we thought that it was global cooling. false.
todays "warming crisis" is false.
bigmac27712 3 years ago
and we know global pollution is happening. around 2 million die each year from air pollution. and thousands of killed coal miners.
wonderfulskirt 3 years ago 2
I'm sure the big energy companies have plans to ensure we keep paying big bucks for inefficient power
notsodeadlydave 3 years ago 10
those solar panels and windmills are looking better every day!
IF ONLY WE HAD GERMANYS FEED IN TARRIFS!!!
brimoy 3 years ago 2
great!
bbproductionsLA 3 years ago 2
It costs £1,500.00 to install a windmill thingy on the roof of your house & u will save £15.00 per annum on your electricty bill.
Shame u wont live long enough to recoop ur investment.
wotnochips 3 years ago
Plus, the windmill thingy on your roof used LOTS OF ENERGY to manufacture it. It won't even break even green-energy wise for several years.
PhilosopherEight 3 years ago
The earth is changing everyday, it has been much warmer than it is now and it has been colder. This is a natural occurrence. I do not believe we need to be arguing if we are causing climate change. Spend the money and resources on finding not only cleaner but cheaper and sustainable forms of energy. I believe there are already answers to most of these energy needs but the financial interests of Business and Government will not allow it. They do not want energy sources they can't control.
utubedaveg 3 years ago
your right, and i want CHEAP energy, renewable energy is VERY CHEAP and stable. we need to support Green Collar jobs in USA, especially in our beginning stages of a recession.
trillobite 3 years ago 2
Green Energy produces only a tiny fraction of the energy we need. It never will do more because of basic limitations of physics.
Oil does work equivalent to 2 TRILLION man-hours of labor each and every day. EVERY DAY.
Show me ANY green technology that can produce even 10% of this - it doesn't exist. 1%? Nope.
Either we get serious and get Nuclear Fusion technology online, or we are going to face a huge energy crisis.
But you guys just keep playing with windmills and solar cells...
PhilosopherEight 3 years ago
Business and Government don't want energy sources they can't control? How could they not control ANY energy source? And why would they not want to expand their power into these other power methods? Paranoia indeed.
The reason why these green technologies aren't abundantly found is very simple: THEY DON'T WORK WELL ENOUGH TO POWER THE WORLD.
The push for green solutions only is distracting us from our only true solution: Nuclear Fusion.
PhilosopherEight 3 years ago
The only true solution is to stop being resource pigs.
And Nuclear Fusion runs out too killing lots of people along the way.
t89gg98t 3 years ago 4
No, the only true solution is population reduction. That is the only way we can use less resources. Even if we cut usage 50%, all those gains are wiped out when the population grows another 50%.
And Nuclear Fusion does not 'run out'. I don't even know what you mean by that.
PhilosopherEight 3 years ago
Nuclear fusion does not run out. It's primary source of fuel is water. We have oceans full and if we "run out" of that we are done for anyway ! The source is recycled back to the same water we started with.
stuffdone 3 years ago
Clean, safe power with no nuclear death! Like nuclear fusion! See my blog for how!
JonThm 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
boring mate!!!! I own five 8litre american muscle cars!! fuck ya global warming!!
ronseal2008 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm with you bloke! It's better than freezin' our arse off!
bogesk 4 years ago
Less than the amount you emit from your every orifice each day I'm betting. Additionally, this video doesn't even scratch the surface of modern technology and renewable energies. Solar and wind are the future as well as magnetic motor technology. It's only a matter of time but the technology is and has been with us since the early 90's. Why I wonder are there so many skeptics... hmmm.
damianpaonejazz 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yawn!
How can the eco-terrorists keep churning out this rubbish. It's all becoming a little tedious.
How much Co2 will be produced trying to create these idealistic "green" towns / cities. I rest my case.
lordsnooty01 4 years ago
We'll always need to build new buildings and housing (they don't last forever) so why not spend a little more money in everything we are going to build that will pay for itself in the few years following. If you don't care about temp. rising then surely you want to save money and spend less on fuels that are finite, which by there nature must go up in price.
kaosrulez 3 years ago 3
Congratulations on a clear and well presented video. I absolutely agree that the easiest way forward is to stop wasting energy. There is a big push for heat pumps here in Ireland, but heat pumps are only an efficient way of heating your house with electricity. If the heat pump is 300% efficient, it is only offsetting the 33% efficiency of the power plants. You might as well keep your oil boiler! Heat pumps only make sense when we can generate electricity more efficiently.
phoebebright 4 years ago
Excellent! A 'must watch'
windpowerrocks 4 years ago 2
Please post your question as a video response to our video and your question might be answered by the World Energy Congress leaders. thanks! Our video is: Ask your question to the World Energy Congress delegates.
E3webtv 4 years ago
The war to end all wars..?? What do you mean by that bogesk.
verduzco10 4 years ago
Sorry for the delay in replying. My point is the media constantly bombards us with jingo's, the war to end all wars is a prime example of how hollow they are! All this media attention only centralizes power in govt. Research historical co2 levels, the earth experienced an ice age when co2 was 11 times its present level. Adage "scepticism and mistrust are the parents of security"
bogesk 4 years ago
PS. I don't care I'm still scared shitless about the war to end all wars, the yellow peril, reds under the bed, the domino effect, impending ice age(1970;s), y2k, terrorism, WMD, nuclear Iran and all those other media promoted fears!
bogesk 4 years ago
With such a paranoid yet apathetic attitude as that, nothing useful would ever get done. It's fairly evident that the world IS heating up and regardless of whether it is us doing so, the more energy we can conserve the better!
flaze3 4 years ago
Would it be better if the world were cooling? Paranoid? It is a simple fact that, the slogans I mentioned were all false. flaze3 you use the term 'we' does this mean as individuals, if so, I agree. However if you mean as central planning socialism I disagree, a casual observation of history shows this an inevitable failure. If you disagree with me, present facts and logical reasoned argument!
bogesk 4 years ago
'central planning socialism'?! I never meant THAT at any rate. By 'we' I mean people at large, individually, and those responsible for the production of power as shown in this video.
flaze3 4 years ago
flaze3, I am not suggesting that you or the people who produced the video are not genuine. All I ask is that the material shown is critically & logically analysed. Please watch the video again, see if you can spot any central planning, but first, google 'opportunity cost' and 'economy of scale'.
bogesk 4 years ago
great, I've read about them. But if you're arguing purely for a financial priority, I don't have much sympathy.
flaze3 4 years ago
I'm arguing that central planning & command economies have always failed, and, that centralised financial control leads to the destruction of wealth, freedom, liberty & life. Can you place a value on these things?
bogesk 4 years ago
yes. I'm just not sure that you're right in what you assume.
flaze3 4 years ago
Assume? financial control failed in soviet russia mao's china nth korea & cuba. can you provide substantive fact that state control produces positive values? Quantitative & qualitative?
bogesk 4 years ago
Why must I? It is YOU who is objecting to what seems to be to be a useful and productive idea. You fling around these terms and I am increasingly unconvinced by you.
flaze3 4 years ago
You don't, it is YOU who used the term paranoid! "Seems to be?" All I have done is question the ideas presented, regrettably with sarcasm. Logic, if central planning fails on a large scale, why would it work on a smaller scale?
bogesk 4 years ago
Enough of this. Present your economical arguments to others; I have lost interest in this argument.
flaze3 4 years ago
I don't get it! How can co2 inside the greenhouse be different from the co2 outside? Do they change the laws of chemistry? Obviously the forests don't deserve the essential trace elements! Oh, now I get it, encourage more laws and regulations, that worked so well in the soviet union command economy. Can't have individuals with freedom of choice can we now!
bogesk 4 years ago
It looks to me like some countries fight these solutions tooth and nail because making a quick buck (lots of) is easier the old way. And to hell with the future...
yoyojon999 4 years ago 2
My god, that sounds really great!!, i live in mexico, sad to say our secretary of energy is only thinking about piñatas and coke parties...
basi76 4 years ago
This video is highly relevant to the OU T307 course. I will post a link to the course team, but it would be really helpful if it was tagged / searchable from the terms CHP, Woking, Microgeneration and Renewable.
Thank you, great info.
LinziRich 4 years ago
I'll help you if you give me those 200 bucks :)
molotov47 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This the bulletin he read:
My name is Jaime Heras. I'm 14 years old. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I have no face. When you look at me you'll die immediately. You have 900seconds to repost this or I will visit you tonight.
Repost this ''12.''' dgxxx
Copy and past this to 10 vedo or you mum will die within the next 4 hours.......
herbeboy 4 years ago
hay u what u have writen haaa!!!!!!!!!!!
u 14
tmghunt 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm sorry really so so sorry i don't want my mom dying :copy and paste this to 10 videos or your mom will die within the next 4 hours
markprice123456789 4 years ago
aaaHAaaa... noW I knoW som of global Warming 2... but just a little little little little... poingpoingpoing:P
luftspiegelung 4 years ago
Boxxen,
Thank you for this well thought out doco, very inspirational.
We also have similar problems in New Zealand (my home). There are severe legislative problems preventing the uptake of small scale distributed energy. I'd like to make a mashup of your video re-using the european content - but targeting it at the issues New Zealand faces. Would you be willing to provide me with the content, or at least allow me to reproduce the content from your video?
Cheers,
Greg.
711greg 4 years ago
Hi Greg - sending you a message now.
boxxen 4 years ago
WaterFurnace Channel: What about what the EPA called the "most energy efficient, environmentally clean, and cost-effective" systems available? Geothermal heat pumps burn no fossil fuels, are 5 times more efficient than gas furnaces, and reduce utility bills up to 70%.
It's equal to planting 750 trees or taking 2 cars off the road...forever. If 10% of California goes geo, the energy saved equals the output of 9 power plants! Geo could have a huge impact on the environment and dependence on oil.
WaterFurnace 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
dre2012 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
See girls on cam and meet them! Only at CAMAZONCAMS dot COM
natalinahotmommad 4 years ago
Nikola! We are you?!
Tesla! You're alive. JP Morgan (the actual Morgan Chase Manhattan) undertake your purposal to keep your invention in the Global Elite's Hands. Due to their control of "education", your name disappeared from mankind's memory and curiosity.
But now Consciousness is high through out the World.
Find out "Nikola Tesla's Secret" film on p2p. Everyone must know the "sliding doors" effect going back to 1906, when the ILLUMINATI decided our Planet and Our future.
marcpoling 4 years ago
A while back there was a lot of debate here on whether nuclear power is the answer - we've just made a new short film on that (it covers efficiency, renewables and combined heat and power as well as nuclear). It's called The Convenient Solution - check my latest videos to see it.
boxxen 4 years ago
The sad thing is that even with a 100% renewable powered community, we still have a bit of a problem. How does the community get built? Where does all that energy come from? The steel, the concrete, the wood, the copper, the plastic, the blades, the photovoltaics, etc. Oil... that is why we can never say anything is 100% renewable. We'll be lucky to get to 50% before the other 50% runs out.
Iconoclast421 4 years ago
You're confusing a fixed cost with recurring cost. Yes, it takes oil to build the community, if for nothing else the lubrication the power tools need. But it's used only ONCE in the construction, and is amortized over time. If you have inefficient power grids, you pay the inefficiency tax for as long as it is in operation. Do the math!
hoser4 4 years ago
Good God, these are intelligent men of science, not economy...
The government would do a shoddy job of handling this; it could step aside and perhaps allow for less red tape, but competition is the only way to ensure success. I don't know about the UK's government, but no matter how many flaws I find in the US, capitalism is the only way to go in a "democracy." However, someone save me from my ignorance: how does the UK like capitalist socialism in general?
conglieteri 4 years ago
global warming is invevitable. some where on earth there is a HUGE reserver of methane gas( cant remember were). the gas is already leaking for the bottom of the ocean and some time in the future all of the gas will be released into the air. theres no way in stopping it but we could slow it down by not using so much fucking fossil fuels ( especially USA[btw i live there])
CrinsomMoons 4 years ago
"Global Warming" is bullshit. The planet has had "global warming" since the beginning. There are such things as the Ice Age and the Meltdown. Volanoes harm the atmosphere more than technology does. This is just another attempt at conflict within society. The smarter we become, the dumber we are.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
yeah dumbasss but we're making it worst and volcanoes don't make it worst... CO2 has increased dramatically after the Industrial Revultion don't be a hypocrate and ignore the fact that we have a god damn issue at hand... imbecil...
Mijito123 4 years ago
You're the imbecile. It's the planet's natural course. This is how it revitalizes itself. Do you realize how much feces attribute to the damaging of the atmosphere as well? And back then when mammals were large, that's a lot. Not to mention there were more fucking active volcanoes, which exceeded the amount of how nuclear technology. Use common sense, dickhead.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
You mentioned volcanoes... plus don't you dare deny that CO2 injection into the enviroment isn't changing the god damn nature of earth... it's not a natural course if the glaciers that have been there for billions of year on the antarctic suddenly start vanishing because of the species that has been here for the least ammount of time start pounding on earth!
Mijito123 4 years ago
You are wrong. They haven't been there for billions of years. We are still in our meltdown from our last Ice Age. Before anything was anything, this entire planet was made up of gasses produced by volanoes. The entire world was full of molten rock, lava, and gasses. Billions of years ago. The planet was actually an entire tropical planet, with zero ice.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
God damn it you idiot.. the damn ice age was a critical change of temperature like 4 degree Celcius change! that's it... it's nothing too critical like the stupid little movie you're getting your information from, Ice Age. ALL scientist agree that global warming is a true fact... there has never been a reported when a scientist has said that Global Warming wasn't true... you better be a freaking Einstein or you're like 500 in 6 billion
Mijito123 4 years ago
ANY change in ANY temperature can be enough to accelerate ANYTHING. Are you aware of how the universe was even created? A small fraction of something like 0.00000085 would have caused the universe to NOT be created. When it was created, it was the size of a pin head. Imagine that. The smallest fraction can cause an ENORMOUS IMPACT over time. It is a cycle and recycle. And I am a fucking Einstein. Something scientists gain is intelligence, they lack wisdom and common sense.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
lol now I realize im talking to self-centered idiot... You're a fucking Einstein good luck at the speilling me Mr. 8 year old..
Mijito123 4 years ago
A loser in a debate always resorts to insults, when the battle is lost. Take care of yourself and know that you add to the growing conflict and you'll be one of the many that cause turmoil and civil unrest in life.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
FUCK YOU LOL.
But I say if it is, or isnt our fault, who cares? Lets do something about it, or at least try. Millions of people depend on it.
Davebfd 4 years ago
Nothing depends on it. We should just live and cease worrying.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
Maybe nothing around you does, maybe you dont live near the coast :P
Davebfd 4 years ago
Scottydboi82; You'll think about that when that happens...is your solution to all? What sort of self interest do you have behind your opinion?
myASIMO 4 years ago
What is proof? Proof is convincing someone that something is real. Persuasion is when someone is convinced without a doubt that something is real. Does that mean if I convince someone that reality is fiction, I have proven myself right?
My self-interest is to convince the people of the world that not all things are real. Finally, convincing society to follow my beliefs, leading to a world-wide revolution.
scottydboi82 4 years ago
yes. its about social conscience.cus now, once again, it is the poorest part of the world who dies first. although its our part of the world who's done this... crap isnt it? recycle, and do it for the ilves of smal kids. and everybody else..
anneelille 4 years ago
Way to go, you've proven your superiority. Kudos, dear.
conglieteri 4 years ago
Not my problem, Im in US. Just kidding, were much worse.
wad0cash 4 years ago
and guess who is paying for that? unfortunately Us
GoogleKnight 4 years ago
click on my channel and write a comment please
shortty05 4 years ago
bombok hiç sevmedim
emrah0064 4 years ago
Super2ner, you're right. But nuclear power is something that we haven't mastered yet. There are some elements in this world that stay radioactive for thousands of years, where and how do you discard these elements. Even though 500g of Uranium can produce 30 000 kwh, there are still more cons than pros with this method of energy. Remember the incident in Russia?
shallowshoe 4 years ago
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....>~_~
smcjj 4 years ago
Build a house using twice the insulation.
this will use half the energy.
Use solar and Wind energy.
Tell edison to stuff it.
Build a hybrid you can live in that we all can live with.
Take responsibility pay it forward.
With great kindness.
Wholearthbuilder
onewholearth 4 years ago
Actually doubling the thickness of the insulation in a building will not halve the energy usage. It's a case of diminishing returns.
Mechness 3 years ago
Excellent! read natural capital. visit wholearthbuilder
onewholearth 4 years ago
great video, i nvr knew about this
jimmynosgood 4 years ago
why you ask... It's all about payoffs or "gifts" to politicians. Medical doctors are also guilty, if a drug company gives very nice gifts then that is the drug he pushes to his patients. Virtually everyone can be bought. Oil companies pay off and even will kill those that threaten their lively hood. What would you do to protect your multi trillion dollar business from topling to the ground?
sorrellindustries 4 years ago
Americas leaders..... Make some laws to help the world, and mankind..
serpents7 4 years ago
Decentralization can completely change the way we use energy in the western world, and make it cheaper, its not the answer as it would probably use unsustainable natural gas fuel. The answer, is a mix of different renewable technologies
jimscottuk 4 years ago
U R ALL FREAKING NERDS!!!! EVERYONE WHO COMMITED!(exsept me :o)ESPECIALY THE ONE WHO MADE IT! I TYPED INTRESTING IN AND IT BROUGHT UP THIS!?!?!?! U SUCK!
ALSO IM REPORTING THIS JUST SO OTHERS WONT BE BORED!
decuscrub 4 years ago
and ur the ignoranthuman being that doesnt give a fk abour ur own life or other people
BFSpecifications 4 years ago
And you are evidently a braintrust!
ravenlighte 4 years ago
The 1600 MWe European Pressurized Reactor reactor is being built in Olkiluoto, Finland. A joint effort of French AREVA and German Siemens AG, it will be the largest reactor in the world.
And i'm damn proud about that! Greenpeace sucks.
MokomaSusi 4 years ago
global Warming started at the end of the last ice age, so we are not entirely responsible, its just the media that portray this,, however we MUST take steps to slow the process down to preserve our civiilisation, SCRAP NUKES (weapons and energy generation) switch to anti-gravity, hydrogen, solar, wind and hydro power generation, stop sucking the earth dry of oil, legalise industrial hemp farming
Orillasound 4 years ago
Let me correct you, I live in denmark, and you get a bear allright, but you have to pay for at least 5. I am allmost sure that energy is about 3times more expencive in denmark than in the uk!
fladfisken 4 years ago
we use lots of power to mine it, it would be located far away from the stations becaue the uranium is in the middle of Australia; which means trucks would have to transport it many kilometres emitting massive amounts of CO2. In addition, we have no idea how to deposit of the waste! It is not the answer...renewables all the way
jampt1989 4 years ago
I believe a small fire log sized fuel rod is equivalent to 400 tons of coal, and the fuel used by a CANDU reactor uses only about 3% or so enriched uranium that would emit the same background radiation from the mine it came from after only 500 years, not 100,000 years, can any body out there confirm this.
kelthebeachcomber 4 years ago
Of course nuclear has its advantages...it is extremely efficient, i can't remember the rate of efficiency juxtaposed with the efficiency of coal. But we will run out of it
jampt1989 4 years ago
Nuclear plants are actually less economical than coal plants on a financial basis. Solar and wind power are two of the fastest growing segments of the economy and they are actually more reliable than large centralized systems. Having solar cells spread over a community means that a downed powerline across town won't turn off your lights.
paradalisj 4 years ago
solar cells and wind power do not work everwhere,you need the perfect location,but they should be utilized where current technology permits, nuclear energy can be used everwhere, although to use nuclear energy to refine tar sand oil is self defeating
kelthebeachcomber 4 years ago
but nuke plants create way more power than coal compared coal is a d battery to nukes
super2ner 4 years ago
Nuclear power's worst pollution is the technology and materials spread across the world to create nuclear weapons.
paradalisj 4 years ago
Nuclear is NOT the answer. It uses massive amounts of water (not a good idea here in Australia where we have the worst drought ever), it is a nonrenewable (estimated in Australia as only 100 years worth if we switch to nuclear)...
jampt1989 4 years ago
How funny was the guy from the Netherlands! Notice how many people where cycling! It's amazing! One, it takes cars off the road and two we are combatting the obesity crisis. We live leaky, ineffitient lives and need to change that
jampt1989 4 years ago
Seems to me like a good idea - cut out the wasted energy in our old system and we don't need as much, right?? So wind and hydro can be the solution too.
Broadcasterrrr 4 years ago
No. The solution: WIND AND HYDRO
leongjh1 4 years ago
What are we waiting for? An energy crisis.
We clearly need to conserve fuel.
THE SOLUTION: NUCLEAR
thparadox 4 years ago
No mention on weather woking concil saved money after their invest in decentralised power, it probably wont pay for itself for another 100 years! in the end cost is what will determin the sucsess of these shcemes
CopywriteFree 4 years ago
This video conveniently fails to tell you all about the technical aspects of such of decentralised energy systems. What Greenpeace suggest here is 100% correct, BUT there is no way we can have a fully decentralised generation system in the specified time frame. In the UK all our present power stations will be at the end of their working life very soon. There is only one near term solution. Nuclear Power! Unfortunately Greenpeace protest this. So, in other words...
Genius83 4 years ago
sentido comun, gente comun, energia comun, bla bla bla: "COMUNISMO". i am sure you all understand this as well.
citizenX117 4 years ago
"Absorb/Release ..." yes that is true but the point here is that transporting the energy is inefficient. Electrical wires all have a resistance and that causes heat energy to be lost along the length of the cable.. I did not know it was 2/3 s that was lost. 100% efficiency is impossible.
oncebarn 5 years ago
BIOMASS IS CO2 NEUTRAL? what the stupid heck?
carbonic material such as vegetebal (biomass or whatever you want), wood or living beings make CO2 when burning..
Burning is a chmical reaction between material and O2: Carbon + Oxygene make C02.
yacetube 5 years ago
Well, yeah -- everyone knows that biomass released CO2 when burned. But it is neutral in that it absorbs about the same amount of CO2 before that when it is still green and growing. See? Absorb/Release Absorb/Release etc. Duh.
feelytouchy67 5 years ago
nuclear power plants don't reject global warming gas !
..but oh yes it does, it's water. very dangerous. DAMN FUCKING OIL AND PESTICIDEs(its not about warming..but destroying life itself..in the ground, water, animals vegtals..and human) look, when did cancer came?
yacetube 5 years ago
One of the troubles with CHP is that many of them use paper waste to burn, which comes from households and business surrounding the CHP plants. Residents, who supply the paper products, believe that it is for recycling, they are never told that the paper is burnt in the CHP plants. The question we should be asking should we recycle our paper to save our trees or burn it and cut down more trees to be burnt in CHP plants!
Why don't we use solar power, wind or wave power, which comes free?
Phil1960 5 years ago
One of the troubles with CHP is that many of them use paper waste to burn, which comes from households and business surrounding the CHP plants. Residents, who supply the paper products, believe that it is for recycling, they are never told that the paper is burnt in the CHP plants. The question we should be asking should we recycle our paper to save our trees or burn it and cut down more trees to be burnt in CHP plants!
Why don't we use solar power, wind or wave power, which comes free?
Phil1960 5 years ago
One thing I really like about this video is that is shows so clearly how more-efficient and alternative technologies are NOT "pie-in-the-sky" dreams of spaced out hippies, but are already a reality in parts of Europe.
feelytouchy67 5 years ago
A very apt solution (or at least a significant part of the solution) -- this decentralization. The quickest way that everyone will go for it is when either the gov't is forced, due to shortages, to mandate rationing, or a true "free market, level playing field" political reality is realized -- that is, a market without the current obscene subsidies to nuclear, coal, oil etc. that distort everything.
feelytouchy67 5 years ago
blaablabla, everybody knows how to handle, but just do it then. turn off your PC, tv and radio when you don't use them!
Greenpeace is really short-sighted. Just build hundreds of nuclear plants so energy problem ánd CO2 problems will be gone. Just dump the nuclear stuff protected underground.
bergje82 5 years ago
wind power is relatively inexpensive and can be manufactured very quick producing power for under 10 cents a kilowatt in large wind farms. The problem is that you need the perfect location to make them viable, so they can't replace all coal fired electric stations, just some of them.
kelthebeachcomber 5 years ago
If wind power is so brilliant, why don't Greenpeace set up their own wind power company and make a zillion pounds from building windmills? Because they're full of shit that's why.
Number1BadBoyInnit 5 years ago
the cost of not reaching a consensus to use nuclear energy is even more pollution. It is the only clean option available to replace 1000 coal fired plants. Striving to reduce energy consumption is only part of the equation, trying to convince 6 billion people that they have to change their lifestyles will be harder than accepting nuclear energy.
kelthebeachcomber 5 years ago
and what is the cost
RocketManF4 5 years ago
getting a consensus to actually go with decentralizing is probably more difficult than getting a consensus to go nuclear, nuclear energy will give a bigger bang for the buck in replacing coal fired electric plants and entering a hydrogen economy, we still need clean electricty to make lots of hydrogen or to charge electric cars
kelthebeachcomber 5 years ago
The cost of building nuclear plants is huge & there is still the problem of what to do with the highly toxic waste. Do we really want to bury it for our grandchildren to have to deal with? Is that how we work, make a big mess now and leave someone else to clean it up? We have just a couple of years to sort our CO2 emmissions before it is too late to stop climate chaos, even if nuclear was clean there is no way the plants would be built and operational in time to make a difference.
greenfairy07 5 years ago
Thank you! That's exactly why nuclear is not the right decision! We would be slightly combatting the climate change crisis, but burdening our grandchildren with toxic waste
jampt1989 4 years ago
So if this is a 'natural cycle', then we're not doing the Earth any harm by pumping MORE greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, now are we?
liamwaddle 5 years ago
i am leaning towards the use of nuclear energy as our solution to the kyoto agreement.Solar technolgy is to expensive, we are out of hydro sites, tidal and wave power is local, coal oil and gas are too dirty, geothermal technology is limited ,not enough viable locations for all the wind power we would require .we can build wind generation stations to fill the gap in the short term. nuclear is the only quick fix to our global warming problem.
kelthebeachcomber 5 years ago
Have you seen 'what are we waiting for?'. Try a search for decentralised energy and take a look at the vid, I'm sure it will give you a new perspective.
greenfairy07 5 years ago
The logistics of getting everyone to agree to the concept of decentralized energy will be more difficult than the actual transition. nuclear is a better bang for the buck, although decentralizing could be part of plan
kelthebeachcomber 5 years ago