|
|
| Author |
Message |
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
 Posted: 08/25/03 - 15:22 Post subject: $100,000,000,000
|
|
|
To upgrade the power grid. That's a lot of zeroes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43005-2003Aug25.html
Naturally liberals don't fail to let us down, even over something like this.
| Quote: | | Activist groups said consumers shouldn't be stuck paying the bill. |
Who would pay the bill? The electric company...whose revenues come from consumers? We need better education in this country.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Banzai
Guest
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 15:36 Post subject:
|
|
|
f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 15:41 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Krumble
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 771
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:04 Post subject:
|
|
|
It also does nothing to solve the problem of actually getting elecricity to workplaces and houses.. for which, they would need a new grid.
The problem with hydrogen, however, is not in the fact that we cannot produce it efficiently today. The problem is that it cannot be produced at a rate that can compete with hydrocarbon fuels, in addition to various safety and environmental concerns.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
median
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2183
Location: Hamillton, Canada
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:06 Post subject:
|
|
|
power goes out for 24 hours and everyone is scared shitless.
kinda makes you wonder.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Eduin
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1046
Location: Glasgow
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
I think these "liberal" groups are suggesting that the Federal Government spends the money to subsidise teh companies for a few billion dollars rather than spending that money on military expenditure to invade iraq just to make Yankees feel better about 11/9 (and make a shitload of cash for the executives of a few select Bushist companies like Haliburton)..
Regards,
Eduin
Last edited by Eduin on 08/25/03 - 16:17; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
median
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2183
Location: Hamillton, Canada
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
oops
Last edited by median on 08/25/03 - 16:10; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
median
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2183
Location: Hamillton, Canada
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
oops
Last edited by median on 08/25/03 - 16:09; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:15 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Eduin wrote: | I think these "liberal" groups are suggesting that the Federal Government spends the money to subsidise teh companies for a few billion dollars rather than spending that money on military expenditure to invade iraw just to make Yankees feel better about 11/9 (and make a shitload of cash for the executives of a few select Bushist companies like Haliburton)..
Regards,
Eduin |
Where's that suggestion, dumbfuck? They say they don't want consumers paying the bill. Virtually every American is a consumer of electricity, so whether a consumer writes a check to the companies revamping the grid or whether they pay that to the government which in turn takes their bureaucratic surcharge and passes a fraction onto the companies revamping the grid, the consumer still pays. "Liberals" are complete morons when it comes to money. First they bankrupt the USSR, then California, and now they offer these brilliant financial suggestions for public works.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:20 Post subject:
|
|
|
Post Farm!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Eduin
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1046
Location: Glasgow
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:23 Post subject:
|
|
|
| WheresNWS wrote: |
Where's that suggestion, dumbfuck? They say they don't want consumers paying the bill. Virtually every American is a consumer of electricity, so whether a consumer writes a check to the companies revamping the grid or whether they pay that to the government which in turn takes their bureaucratic surcharge and passes a fraction onto the companies revamping the grid, the consumer still pays. "Liberals" are complete morons when it comes to money. First they bankrupt the USSR, then California, and now they offer these brilliant financial suggestions for public works. |
It's hard to respond to such ridiculous idiocy. If somoene says "consumers shouldn't pay", {i}a priori{/i] it means that you want a redistribution of existing budgets. Why not use the idiotic waste of humanity and cash the US is spending on Iraq to fix some huge problems in America? The only people beneifiting from Iraw are the likes of Donald Rumsfeld (massive shareholder and former CEO of Haliburton) and other bush stooges. It makes sense. Spend the money on Americans not on American companies in Iraq.
Regards,
Eduin
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
median
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2183
Location: Hamillton, Canada
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:25 Post subject:
|
|
|
i dont see what you think is wrong with being liberal. Come live in Canada and I can assure you you would like it better than living in the states. The social saftey nets (ie. Health care, Retirement,) are great and cmon, what kind of law is 21 years to drink?
You can get married and have a family, yet you're still not responsible enough to drink?
Liberals kick ass, you would totaly agree if you lived in a "civilized" liberal society.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Majy
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1713
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:27 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
You could buy such a good EQ account w/ that much money.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
median
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2183
Location: Hamillton, Canada
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:30 Post subject:
|
|
|
I would also not want to pay for the fuckups in the power grid. That is another common feeling americans have, that they are on their own. Well guess what, your not, you are all americans and I would be pretty p****d off if I had to pay a bill because my local power company couldnt supply the people.
Dont just sit there and let them f**k u up the ass, stand up for yourself!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Median, you are obviously bringing a knife to a gunfight in this discussion. I'm sure the people arguing your side of the discussion wish you would stop posting.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:57 Post subject:
|
|
|
| WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
Don't forget the fact that a hydrogen car goes off like a hundred pounds of dynamite in a crash. Think how much more exciting the evening news would be with all those explosions on the freeway every day.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Docter
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3420
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 16:59 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
NUCLEAR POWER!!!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Syke
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2976
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:04 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Luturb wrote: | | WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
Don't forget the fact that a hydrogen car goes off like a hundred pounds of dynamite in a crash. Think how much more exciting the evening news would be with all those explosions on the freeway every day. |
I don't think he was talking about vehicles....
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Syke
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 2976
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:08 Post subject:
|
|
|
I'd also like to add that I feel really great about Eduin owning WhereNWS right there...man that felt good but it wasn't even me doing the owning.
Where's that false sense of superiority against the masses there WhereNWS? oh...what? it's...its gone? ...omg where ever could it be?
Oh that's RIGHT!...Eduin has it...awwwwwww 
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:18 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Syke wrote: | | I don't think he was talking about vehicles.... |
Hmm, perhaps not. However, petroleum is not the fuel of the future, and whether we go to hydrogen or electric cars the result will be a large increase in the amount of electricity we need to produce, in addition to increasing demand for traditional uses of electricity. b
Going back to the original question, it's not fair at this point to be against deregulation and for power companies footing the bill to revamp the grid. For generations the government forced power companies to sell electricity at a very low profit margin. As a result, they have not invested in infrastructure. Now you expect the power companies to pay for grid improvements, but still expect them to produce electricity without raising rates? If you expect the power companies to pay for grid renovations, then you'ld better be ready to let them raise rates to pay for it. Either way the electricity consumers/taxpayers (same people) are going to have to pay for this.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:26 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Eduin wrote: | | WheresNWS wrote: |
Where's that suggestion, dumbfuck? They say they don't want consumers paying the bill. Virtually every American is a consumer of electricity, so whether a consumer writes a check to the companies revamping the grid or whether they pay that to the government which in turn takes their bureaucratic surcharge and passes a fraction onto the companies revamping the grid, the consumer still pays. "Liberals" are complete morons when it comes to money. First they bankrupt the USSR, then California, and now they offer these brilliant financial suggestions for public works. |
It's hard to respond to such ridiculous idiocy. If somoene says "consumers shouldn't pay", {i}a priori{/i] it means that you want a redistribution of existing budgets. Why not use the idiotic waste of humanity and cash the US is spending on Iraq to fix some huge problems in America? The only people beneifiting from Iraw are the likes of Donald Rumsfeld (massive shareholder and former CEO of Haliburton) and other bush stooges. It makes sense. Spend the money on Americans not on American companies in Iraq.
Regards,
Eduin |
Wow, you're ignorant. Rumsfeld never worked for Halliburton. That was d**k Cheney. d**k Cheney does not own stock in Halliburton at all. In the US, investments are placed in a blind trust to prevent conflicts of interest. Halliburton is the contractor of choice for most of Iraq because it is the largest engineering company in America that works on oil-related projects. A liberal like you would probably grant the contract to inner-city youth.
But your ignorance of fact aside...there is no mention of redistribution of budgets from our worthwile military efforts around the world (which would still require consumers to pay for electricity, only at the cost of national security). The liberal activists said they don't want consumers spending the money. Period. For a liberal, this typically means they want the corporation to fund the project because, as I stated, liberals are ignorant and can't realize that corporate revenue comes from consumers.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:33 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Luturb wrote: | | Syke wrote: | | I don't think he was talking about vehicles.... |
Hmm, perhaps not. However, petroleum is not the fuel of the future, and whether we go to hydrogen or electric cars the result will be a large increase in the amount of electricity we need to produce, in addition to increasing demand for traditional uses of electricity. b
Going back to the original question, it's not fair at this point to be against deregulation and for power companies footing the bill to revamp the grid. For generations the government forced power companies to sell electricity at a very low profit margin. As a result, they have not invested in infrastructure. Now you expect the power companies to pay for grid improvements, but still expect them to produce electricity without raising rates? If you expect the power companies to pay for grid renovations, then you'ld better be ready to let them raise rates to pay for it. Either way the electricity consumers/taxpayers (same people) are going to have to pay for this. |
No I'm not talking about vehicles (although the problems the are only compounded). "Hydrogen power" is a stupid concept because unbound hydrogen is rare in nature, so you have to put in more energy to extract the hydrogen than you net in the end, thanks to thermodynamics.
Obviously oil is a limited resource, but we have a tremendous amount of infrastructure built on it (How many gas stations are there?) and we should exploit it as long as we can. Going into the future, we will need alternate energy sources, but "hydrogen power" is not the right answer. Nuclear power is cheap and safe, but all this doesn't answer the problems with transmission, which I think are being overstated, anyway.
In the end, upgrades will come at the cost of the public. Whether we do it the inefficient way and have the government do it or if we have the private sector do it, it will come out of our pocketbooks. Of course we could always do it Eduin's way at the cost of our national security, but as the fat f*g has already demonstrated, he would like to see as many American lives destroyed as possible, so it's probably a good idea to ignore ideas like his.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Banzai
Guest
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:53 Post subject:
|
|
|
| WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
You are making assumptions that are not correct. You are also thinking in terms of conventional technology which is very limited in it's scope. These things take time and vision.
Solar to steam to power the turbine (hell even tidal turbines) to make the power that makes the hydrogen (that you can store) that can be used to operate the hydrogen turbine later that will make the by product of water.
If you would like to get technical I would be more than happy to indulge you however you are going to need to look beyond what is currently available and think a little broader than the example you gave in order to see any benefit. It might be hard, I know, but there are solutions that don't take existing methodology.
Education and innovation are not to be confused with one another my friend.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Banzai
Guest
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 17:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Luturb wrote: | | WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
Don't forget the fact that a hydrogen car goes off like a hundred pounds of dynamite in a crash. Think how much more exciting the evening news would be with all those explosions on the freeway every day. |
Automotive hydrogen useage is a totaly seperate concept.
By the way the h-bomb and the Hindenburge react diffrently. You don't smash atoms to make a car go just yet. Granted unstable hydrogen in an accedent wouldn't be pretty but we are not talking Hirosima.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 18:01 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Banzai wrote: | | WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
You are making assumptions that are not correct. You are also thinking in terms of conventional technology which is very limited in it's scope. These things take time and vision.
Solar to steam to power the turbine (hell even tidal turbines) to make the power that makes the hydrogen (that you can store) that can be used to operate the hydrogen turbine later that will make the by product of water.
If you would like to get technical I would be more than happy to indulge you however you are going to need to look beyond what is currently available and think a little broader than the example you gave in order to see any benefit. It might be hard, I know, but there are solutions that don't take existing methodology.
Education and innovation are not to be confused with one another my friend. |
In this case a little education would be useful. You're looking at hydrogen as a method of storing energy, but it is by far not the best way. There are already solar cells, which are currently far too inefficient for serious use and even a tidal turbine in the works. however, why not just transmit that power directly from those means, rather than waste energy by producing highly volitile hydrogen? I agree that there will probably be good energy innovations in the future for the production, transmission and storage of power, but why does everyone always say "hydrogen"? It offers no real benefit, except in some extreme cases. I can't predict what will be thought up in the future (or I'd be a billionaire) but currently, hydrogen offers no real benefit to power.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
syrox
Rookie
Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 70
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 18:03 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
hydrogen cars are MUCH safer than gasoline cars... ifthey explode, thegas floats up and away from the car, as opposed to drenching it in gasoline and havingthe whole car catch fire. do some research into it, they ran a shitload of tests.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 18:06 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Banzai wrote: | | Luturb wrote: | | WheresNWS wrote: | | Banzai wrote: | f**k the grid, put that cash into R&D for hydrogen power.
NYC is right next to an ocean. Throw up some desalination plants and hydrogen turbines and they won't need to suck off of the great white north. They by product is WATER which they need anyway.
Good god people are stupid in a crisis. They would rather spend a gazillion dollars on a band aid than work on a new solution. |
So you want to put energy into a system that electrolysizes water so that you can create hydrogen at a total net loss of energy, so that you can then convert that hydrogen back into energy by burning it...at another net loss of energy? Again, back to the whole education thing. |
Don't forget the fact that a hydrogen car goes off like a hundred pounds of dynamite in a crash. Think how much more exciting the evening news would be with all those explosions on the freeway every day. |
Automotive hydrogen useage is a totaly seperate concept.
By the way the h-bomb and the Hindenburge react diffrently. You don't smash atoms to make a car go just yet. Granted unstable hydrogen in an accedent wouldn't be pretty but we are not talking Hirosima. |
It doesn't have to be nuclear to be dangerous. I wouldn't drive a car with a tank of hydrogen in it, though, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 18:10 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Granted unstable hydrogen in an accedent wouldn't be pretty but we are not talking Hirosima. |
Lol of course not, but you don't nuclear fission to have what an explosives guy I took a class from refers to as "a significant emotional event". Hydrogen in cars is much more dangerous than gasoline but not quite a weapon of mass destruction  .
I'm all for reasearch. Petroleum is not going to last forever and it's very important that we explore all possible alternatives as soon as possible. The sooner we can begin using environmentally friendly power the better, but deciding not to improve current infrastructure because we may or may not be able to develop viable alternatives in the future is not a reasonable suggestion.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Luturb
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 4042
Location: Livermore, California
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 18:40 Post subject:
|
|
|
Been reading up a little...
Really hydrogen isn't a horrible safety risk. Gasoline can explode too in the right circumstances, and as Syrox mentioned, if you have a leak but no fire, hydrogen dissipates instead of making a big flammable pool under your car like gasoline. Hydrogen cars have a lot of potential, but it's not going to happen overnight. In 20 or 30 years I could see hydrogen cars replacing petroleum. Just think of the infrastructure that would have to be switched over though. BMW's prototype hydrogen cars have to be refilled by a robotic system, and only get half the range of a gasoline car with the same size tank. Imagine replacing all of the US's gas stations with hydrogen fill-up stations with different tanks and robot refuelling arms, especially if people have to stop for gas twice as much as they do now.
Fuel cells are prohibitively expensive. Extremely strong and well-insulated tanks are required to keep the liquid hydrogen cold enough(-423 degrees F) that it doesn't evaporate, which are also expensive.
There is still the issue of how to manufacture the hydrogen efficiently as well. Don't have time to read up on that today, but maybe somebody can post some links :p.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Occulis
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 13293
Location: Moral Relativity Central
|
|
Posted: 08/25/03 - 19:12 Post subject:
|
|
|
The idea of busting apart our water supply just for energy is pretty frightening.
The stats may 'prove' that we can never use all the water, but energy is like income. If you have it, you spend it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
