GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Drill More.. Natural Gas.. Clean Coal.... Why no geothermal???? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=853112)

Tempest 09-05-2008 06:00 PM

Drill More.. Natural Gas.. Clean Coal.... Why no geothermal????
 
I read an MIT report recently about geo thermal energy for the US and to me it appears that it's the very best option for long term... So why is everyone pushing for drilling more oil (non renewable), moving towards natural gas (non renewable), "clean" coal (non renewable plus it's actually dirty and costs more than geothermal), wind (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes), solar (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes) and bio-fuels (risk to food crops, subject to seasonal weather and long term climate changes).

This is for electrical energy generation for buildings, electric vehicles etc.

GigoloShawn 09-05-2008 06:03 PM

My car already has a geyser. :helpme

The problem is that GeoThermal is very location centric. Remember how badly California got fucked by Enron because they didn't have enough power, and had to buy some? Imagine that, but with a very very small generator capable of producing power for a small suburb. It's not feasible; it'd cost too much and produce too little.

fatfoo 09-05-2008 06:03 PM

indeed... why no geothermal

Tempest 09-05-2008 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GigoloShawn (Post 14714693)
My car already has a geyser. :helpme

The problem is that GeoThermal is very location centric. Remember how badly California got fucked by Enron because they didn't have enough power, and had to buy some? Imagine that, but with a very very small generator capable of producing power for a small suburb. It's not feasible; it'd cost too much and produce too little.

According to the report I read, you'd be wrong about that.

California is it's own "problem" in terms of how much energy it needs... We've (BC, Canada) actually "sold/sell" electricty to them as well.

Since you can never protect anything 100%, from a security/stability issue, I'd rather have more power plants than less so that if a few go down the grid would stay up. By having that type of system in place, they become less of a desirable target as well.

TheDoc 09-05-2008 06:16 PM

Solar... We have 300 + days of sun shine in bottom half of Arizona and 99% of the state is cactus and rocks.

Wind and hydro power from water currents, between the two they never stop moving.

GigoloShawn 09-05-2008 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714739)
According to the report I read, you'd be wrong about that.

Technically, if you dig deep enough, you're going to find it - but even with the multitude of hot springs here, there's hardly enough to harness to do anything viable with. I'll bug the local utilities commission for the report, but it ended up being that this enormous block-by-a-block geothermal power plant south of me produces enough power for nearly six blocks, provided they're not power hungry - and it's recent equipment, too, under 10 years old.

Tempest 09-05-2008 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GigoloShawn (Post 14714766)
Technically, if you dig deep enough, you're going to find it - but even with the multitude of hot springs here, there's hardly enough to harness to do anything viable with. I'll bug the local utilities commission for the report, but it ended up being that this enormous block-by-a-block geothermal power plant south of me produces enough power for nearly six blocks, provided they're not power hungry - and it's recent equipment, too, under 10 years old.

It sounds like the ones there aren't using the latest "technology".. Who knows..
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/geothermal.html

Tempest 09-05-2008 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 14714744)
Solar... We have 300 + days of sun shine in bottom half of Arizona and 99% of the state is cactus and rocks.

Wind and hydro power from water currents, between the two they never stop moving.

Sounds like for your region solar, wind etc. is the way to go.

pocketkangaroo 09-05-2008 06:35 PM

Depending on who gets elected in November, I think it's a stretch to believe any of these things become reality.

bbm 09-05-2008 07:27 PM

Keep dreaming, oil bosses wont let you to use that kind of energy

TheDoc 09-05-2008 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714817)
Sounds like for your region solar, wind etc. is the way to go.

Solar for here, Nevada and the flats, I don't know how many square miles that is, but it's a major amount of possible solar power stations that could be built. I really think houses in this part of the country should be built with solar and/or give huge tax cuts for people that get them.

The wind hydro power is a combo platform that goes into the ocean or water ways. Hydro power is one of the best sources of continual energy, mixing the two together you get a non stop power supply.

One windmill is able to power a large high school, costing a good bit up front but saving each school $100kish a year in bills. A single smaller windmill in Texas powers a massive car dealership.

Between hydro water ways mixed with wind, and the windmills and solar, this Country has more than enough renewable energy sources it could tap into.

Or we could pull the power straight from the atmosphere as Nikola Tesla was once doing.

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE 09-05-2008 07:30 PM

Bush's Ranch in Texas has a unit installed..

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE 09-05-2008 07:32 PM

http://www.ecorazzi.com/2007/02/19/p...-eco-friendly/

mikeyddddd 09-05-2008 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714688)
I read an MIT report recently about geo thermal energy for the US and to me it appears that it's the very best option for long term... So why is everyone pushing for drilling more oil (non renewable), moving towards natural gas (non renewable), "clean" coal (non renewable plus it's actually dirty and costs more than geothermal), wind (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes), solar (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes) and bio-fuels (risk to food crops, subject to seasonal weather and long term climate changes).

This is for electrical energy generation for buildings, electric vehicles etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GigoloShawn (Post 14714766)
Technically, if you dig deep enough, you're going to find it - but even with the multitude of hot springs here, there's hardly enough to harness to do anything viable with. I'll bug the local utilities commission for the report, but it ended up being that this enormous block-by-a-block geothermal power plant south of me produces enough power for nearly six blocks, provided they're not power hungry - and it's recent equipment, too, under 10 years old.

Obama was questioned about clean coal at a town meeting in Pennsylvania today. He listed the problems with all energy sources, including geothermal. Most problems fell into the category of getting the energy from the source to the consumer effeciently.

I was working at the time, so he didn't have my full attention. You may find a news report that has what was said at the meeting.

slapass 09-05-2008 07:51 PM

Solar and wind are great but they are not cost effective. We all want energy but we all want cheap energy. Solar for a home is totally insane as to how small a payback you get. Then do it in huge arrays in the desert and line loss is such a factor that it wipes out the efficiency of size. Same with wind. The key is changing it to DC and sending it down the line and converting it back. But again this is expensive.

Does anyone really think we have a great cheap way to make energy and no one wants to make that cash so we are ignoring it?

aico 09-05-2008 08:04 PM

Because the GeoThermal owners don't own this country.

man blast in your face 09-05-2008 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714688)
I read an MIT report recently about geo thermal energy for the US and to me it appears that it's the very best option for long term... So why is everyone pushing for drilling more oil (non renewable), moving towards natural gas (non renewable), "clean" coal (non renewable plus it's actually dirty and costs more than geothermal), wind (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes), solar (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes) and bio-fuels (risk to food crops, subject to seasonal weather and long term climate changes).

This is for electrical energy generation for buildings, electric vehicles etc.


You read one little report and you think you are an expert.

First, it isn't "everyone" that wants to stick with Oil, coal, natural gas . . . it is the entities involved with oil, coal, natural gas who use their HUGE $$$ to bribe idiots like G W Bush and friends. These companies have the money and thus the power. With that they control the idiots (like George W. Bush and Dick OIL MONEY Cheney). Then, those complete idiots start working for the oil, coal, natural gas and put out a message to the people of the country making them believe that conversion away from OIL, etc. is not a good way to go. FUCKERS!

FUCKING FUCKERS!


Finally, there is NO reason you need to choose ONE alternative. GO AFTER ALL OF THEM! WIND, SOLAR, WATER, GEOTHERMAL, BIO-FUELS. THE COMBINATION OF THESE SOURCES WOULD WIPE OUT THOSE FUCKING OIL FUCKERS TOMORROW! Well, maybe in a few years. BUT WE WOULD BE RID OF THE MIDDLE EAST, POLUTION, EXPENSIVE NON RENEWABLE ENERGY, AND GW BUSH AND FRIENDS! KICK THOSE "W" FUCKERS TO THE CURB! THEY'VE BEEN FUCKING YOU SINCE DAY ONE OF TERM ONE! HOW DID YOU LIKE IT?

papill0n 09-05-2008 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aico (Post 14715077)
Because the GeoThermal owners don't own this country.

correct :2 cents:

Honez 09-05-2008 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 14714744)
Solar... We have 300 + days of sun shine in bottom half of Arizona and 99% of the state is cactus and rocks.

Wind and hydro power from water currents, between the two they never stop moving.

THANK YOU!!!

man blast in your face 09-05-2008 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 14715051)

Does anyone really think we have a great cheap way to make energy and no one wants to make that cash so we are ignoring it?

The answer to that would be YEEESSSS!!!! Are you a fucking retard? Get your head out of your FUCKING ASS!!!!

Seriously, take a good fucking look around. Systems don't change with the benefit of the people in mind. THERE ARE A MILLION EXAMPLES OF THIS YOU CAN SEE TODAY!

You really think that this country couldn't have been free of it's oil ties 10 years ago? 20 years ago? FUCK YOU MORON!

THE FUCKERS WITH THE MONEY AND THE POWER ARE KEEPING YOU RIGHT WHERE THEY WANT YOU - IN THEIR FUCKING POCKET!!!!!!!!

I bet you really believe what you are saying, and that makes me sad.

EonBlue 09-05-2008 08:23 PM

The real question is why nobody is pushing Plasma Gassification technology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_gasification

http://www.plascoenergygroup.com/

The benefits are huge:

- divert garbage away from landfills
- generate clean electricity with a renewable resource (garbage)
- electricity is generated locally
- low emissions and waste by-product

bhutocracy 09-05-2008 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714688)
I read an MIT report recently about geo thermal energy for the US and to me it appears that it's the very best option for long term... So why is everyone pushing for drilling more oil (non renewable), moving towards natural gas (non renewable), "clean" coal (non renewable plus it's actually dirty and costs more than geothermal), wind (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes), solar (subject to daily weather and long term climate changes) and bio-fuels (risk to food crops, subject to seasonal weather and long term climate changes).

This is for electrical energy generation for buildings, electric vehicles etc.

The reason is it's a lot quicker and a lot cheaper to get energy from drilling, and we do need it quickly. Geothermal, or at least Hot Fractured Rocks is isn't "proven" on a large scale and would require significant time and investment to creature the infrastructure and develop the resources. But do I agree 110% that it's one of the central planks we should be moving forward on RIGHT NOW so that in 5 years we're not having the same argument about time and development. Really we need to be doing ALL things. Drilling for more oil and gas, developing wave, solar nano pv and thermal, geothermal, waste biomass, ground tethered gulf stream kites for wind power etc. There won't only be one solution. Hell it won't be long till we're doing coal to gas even though it's pretty much the single worst thing you can do for the environment.
The question isn't why are we drilling for oil and not geothermal, it's why aren't treating alternative energy as a "New Deal" scenario and pouring billions into it from other areas, including the defense budget as it is a national security issue.

man blast in your face 09-05-2008 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14714817)
Sounds like for your region solar, wind etc. is the way to go.


Ya, cause the rest of the U.S. never gets solar or wind and that sort of shit.


Is this ignorance, stupidity, or a severe combination of the two?

USE ALL FUCKING AVAILABLE ALTERNATE SOURCES AND DUMP EVERYTHING INTO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TO GO INTO SHIT YOU'VE ONLY SEEN ON STAR TREK!!!!



SPOCK!

man blast in your face 09-05-2008 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhutocracy (Post 14715129)
The question isn't why are we drilling for oil and not geothermal, it's why aren't treating alternative energy as a "New Deal" scenario and pouring billions into it from other areas, including the defense budget as it is a national security issue.


Hmmmm. I wonder???? I am so confused by that question. I just can't imagine why? I think and think and think about it but I just can't come up with an answer.

I just hope it has nothing to do with the BIG OIL influences on our puppet president and his OIL dipped cohorts that have been playing this fucking game (FUCKING YOU AND ME) for decades.


I just hope that isn't really what is going on. FUCK@@@@@@@@@@@@

Tempest 09-05-2008 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by man blast in your face (Post 14715145)
Ya, cause the rest of the U.S. never gets solar or wind and that sort of shit.


Is this ignorance, stupidity, or a severe combination of the two?

USE ALL FUCKING AVAILABLE ALTERNATE SOURCES AND DUMP EVERYTHING INTO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TO GO INTO SHIT YOU'VE ONLY SEEN ON STAR TREK!!!!



SPOCK!

You're truly an idiot...

TheDoc 09-05-2008 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 14715051)
Solar and wind are great but they are not cost effective. We all want energy but we all want cheap energy. Solar for a home is totally insane as to how small a payback you get. Then do it in huge arrays in the desert and line loss is such a factor that it wipes out the efficiency of size. Same with wind. The key is changing it to DC and sending it down the line and converting it back. But again this is expensive.

Does anyone really think we have a great cheap way to make energy and no one wants to make that cash so we are ignoring it?

With Solar, you need about 5 hours of sun on average daily to fully charge things. So some areas are screwed and plenty have no problems at all breaking that average other than maybe some winter time or random long rain periods.

Anyway, it costs about $15k for every maybe, 3k sqfeet. You put down a deposit, the more you put down the less the payments are, simple as that. So over 5 years, that would be $250 a month electric bill. Again the more you put down, the lower that would be. Some states have tax breaks, and I think fed may as well.

So depending on were you live, it may be no more expensive than just paying your electric bill. It could be more, if you don't have enough sun you can double the cost for batteries.

Some cities/areas buy back unused power, so if you over generate you can build a credit with them for when you need power.

Solar is a for sure solution to major parts of this Country, people just need the tax benefits to motivate them to do it.

man blast in your face 09-05-2008 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 14715159)
You're truly an idiot...


Which is funny coming from a brain dead leak like you. Good luck with your struggle through life!


DON'T BE FUCKED AGAIN!


Finally,

FUCK YOU TEMPEST - you are obviously quite dumb and wholly ignorant and that is very dangerous combination (mostly to you). Just don't kill anybody (other than yourself) as you suffer through your years here on the planet and your life might be considered a "success!"


Good luck mo mo!!!

slapass 09-05-2008 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by man blast in your face (Post 14715095)
The answer to that would be YEEESSSS!!!! Are you a fucking retard? Get your head out of your FUCKING ASS!!!!

Seriously, take a good fucking look around. Systems don't change with the benefit of the people in mind. THERE ARE A MILLION EXAMPLES OF THIS YOU CAN SEE TODAY!

You really think that this country couldn't have been free of it's oil ties 10 years ago? 20 years ago? FUCK YOU MORON!

THE FUCKERS WITH THE MONEY AND THE POWER ARE KEEPING YOU RIGHT WHERE THEY WANT YOU - IN THEIR FUCKING POCKET!!!!!!!!

I bet you really believe what you are saying, and that makes me sad.

Dude you can buy solar for your house. You can go wind power. Look into it and you will see why it is not for everyone right now.

RogerV 09-05-2008 09:39 PM

Are you investing in it?

slapass 09-05-2008 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 14715179)
With Solar, you need about 5 hours of sun on average daily to fully charge things. So some areas are screwed and plenty have no problems at all breaking that average other than maybe some winter time or random long rain periods.

Anyway, it costs about $15k for every maybe, 3k sqfeet. You put down a deposit, the more you put down the less the payments are, simple as that. So over 5 years, that would be $250 a month electric bill. Again the more you put down, the lower that would be. Some states have tax breaks, and I think fed may as well.

So depending on were you live, it may be no more expensive than just paying your electric bill. It could be more, if you don't have enough sun you can double the cost for batteries.

Some cities/areas buy back unused power, so if you over generate you can build a credit with them for when you need power.

Solar is a for sure solution to major parts of this Country, people just need the tax benefits to motivate them to do it.

Look at this site. it is pretty cool in that it lays it out pretty good for your house. I would pay like 18k to save $371/year. Not a month but per year. Where do I sign up???
http://findsolar.com/index.php

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE 09-05-2008 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 14715365)
Look at this site. it is pretty cool in that it lays it out pretty good for your house. I would pay like 18k to save $371/year. Not a month but per year. Where do I sign up???
http://findsolar.com/index.php

Building Type: Residential
State & County: OH - Lucas
Utility: Toledo Edison Co
Utility Type: Investor-Owned Utility
Assumed Average Electric Rate:
Please check against your bill
To recalculate, enter a value and press "enter" on your keyboard -
$/kWh

Assumed Average Monthly Electricity Usage:
Please check against your bill
To recalculate, enter a value and press "enter" on your keyboard -
kWh/Month

Your Average Monthly Electricity Bill:
(Assumed rate x average monthly useage) $ 100 / Month
Tiered Rates Apply:
Yes - See Notes, below!
Time-of-Use Metering Offered: Yes - See Notes, below!
Net-Metering Available: Yes - See Notes, below!
ESTIMATED SYSTEM SIZE
The system size best for your situation will vary based upon product, building, geographic and other variables. We encourage you to work with a Solar Pro who can better estimate the system size best for your situation. We estimate your building will need a system sized between 3.46 kW and 5.18 kW of peak power. This estimate assumes the mid-point of this range.
Solar Rating: Good
4.32 kWh/sq-m/day
Solar System Capacity Required: 4.32 kW of peak power (DC watts)
Roof Area Needed: 432 sq-ft
ESTIMATED SYSTEM COST
This is only an estimate based upon many assumptions. Installation costs can vary considerably. We encourage you to work with a Solar Pro who can provide you with a more detailed cost estimate. We estimate that a 4.32 kW peak power system will cost between $31,104 and $46,656. This estimate assumes the mid-point of this cost range.
Assumed Installation cost:
(before rebates, incentives or tax credits).
See the Cost Notes, below!
To recalculate, enter a value for assumed cost/watt installed and press "enter" on your keyboard. $38,880

assuming $
per watt DC

Expected Toledo Edison Co Utility Rebate:
(Limited to not exceed state max. incentive amount) ($ 0 )
Expected OH State Rebate
($3.5/watt installed)
(Limited to 1st 10000 watts. $2.5/watt thereafter - See notes, below)
(Maximum: $25000)
(Limited to 50% of cost) ($ 12,247 )
OH State Tax Credit/Deduction ($ 0 )
Federal Tax Credit:
(Installation type: Residential ) ($ 2,000 )
Income Tax on Tax Credit: $ 0
YOUR ESTIMATED NET COST: $ 24,633
Monthly Payment (6.5% apr, 30 years): $ 156
SAVINGS & BENEFITS Assumed Utility
Inflation Rate
%
To recalculate, enter a value and press "enter" on your keyboard
Increase in Property Value: $10,360 to $19,761
Exempt from Property Tax: YES
Accelerated (5 yr) Depreciation:
(Installation type: Residential ) No
First-year Utility Savings:
Since this is not a business application, these savings are in after tax dollars. So, your realized savings may actually be higher! $518 to $988
Average Monthly Utility Savings:
(over 25-year expected life of system) $72 to $138
Average Annual Utility Savings:
(over 25-year expected life of system) $869 to $1,658
25-year Utility Savings: $21,736 to $41,460
Return on Investment (ROI):
(with Solar System ave. cost set as asset value) 214%
Return on Investment (ROI):
(with system cost less Property appreciation set as asset value) 369% to 1,081%
Internal Rate of Return (IRR): 3% - 8%
Years to Break even:
(Includes property value appreciation) 2 to 10 years
Years to Break even:
(Assuming no property value appreciation) 9 to 17 years
Greenhouse Gas (CO2) Saved:
over 25-year system life 103.0 tons
206,000 auto miles

TheDoc 09-05-2008 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass (Post 14715365)
Look at this site. it is pretty cool in that it lays it out pretty good for your house. I would pay like 18k to save $371/year. Not a month but per year. Where do I sign up???
http://findsolar.com/index.php

That's a kick ass savings, seeming you are paying to own something rather than paying forever on something you never own. And it increases the value of your home. One day that $371 will turn into 1000's when you own the solar panels and don't have a monthly cost.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc