Navajo Generating Station shut down.

Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems like you just trade one necessary evil for another. Look ar lithium mining in Chile and other countries. Very messy and disruptive. Oh well at least us Americans can feel good cause we don't see it. Lead mining in Canada is really bad. All this talk about green is a smoke screen. We need different sources of energy until the magic bullet shows uo.
 
Please try and imagine the size of a battery that would be required to run a city all night. Even if we increased efficiencies enormously(millions) it would still be improbable. 4th generation nuclear plants distributed around the nation(primarily outside urban centers) makes the most sense, but the same people who hate fossil fuels are resistant to nuclear, and I can't figure out why.
 
Fukishima and 3 mile island come to mind... If we were trying as hard to make nuclear safe as we are getting rid of our existing power options we would already have safe clean power. It's a perception thing.
 
This is an interesting quote from the Manhattan Institute paper above, seems like someone said basically the same thing in this very thread: "Battery storage is quite another matter. Consider Tesla, the world’s best-known battery maker: $200,000 worth of Tesla batteries, which collectively weigh over 20,000 pounds, are needed to store the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil.[49] A barrel of oil, meanwhile, weighs 300 pounds and can be stored in a $20 tank. Those are the realities of today’s lithium batteries. Even a 200% improvement in underlying battery economics and technology won’t close such a gap."
 
Rivergoer said:
Interesting read:

www.manhattan-institute.org

The "New Energy Economy": An Exercise in Magical Thinking

A movement has been growing for decades to replace hydrocarbons, which collectively supply 84% of the world’s energy. Energy expert, Mark Mills, explains why replacing hydrocarbons will not meet America's energy demands.
www.manhattan-institute.org www.manhattan-institute.org
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting this article. It should be a "must read" for everyone. It is very informative and well cited. Many of the statistics are simply amazing to read, and totally at odds with where the United States government (and governments of the world) are deploying their financial resources.

My biggest takeaway is that we earthlings need to find NEW energy sources for our future, and not continue to subsidize 'old' technology like wind and solar, as they will never be able to provide Earth the level of energy we require.

My 2nd biggest takeaway was that our cost of energy in the United States SHOULD have gone down over 25% over the past 20 years (because of new efficiencies invented to extract energy from shale), but has instead increased by 15% primarily because of wind and solar. Thus our overall energy rates have gone up, but not nearly as much as they would have gone up if not for the 'invention' of shale oil extraction. The examples cited were England and France where energy costs have gone up 110% because of their reliance on wind and solar.

Great article. Thanks again for posting.
 
Last edited:
birdsnest said:
Pretty scary to think about the accepted narrative in spite of the numbers.
Click to expand...
That's the same thing I thought - how can this be true, when all you hear from media and pols - mostly regardless of party or source, is the polar opposite?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top