Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Study says renewable energy power plants will overtake natural-gas plants by 2035
Comments
-
There is so much stupid in the above where to start? It should be obvious the fly is attracted to the idea of compressed air because it involves hot air...2001400ex said:
It's not competing economically so we should just bag the idea. Imagine if we did that with the first computer or cell phone.HoustonHusky said:There have been a lot of ideas like that...another one I saw was to compress air into underground caverns and then have the compressed air drive turbines when needed.
Not horrible ideas, but hard to pull off at a massive scale and still not competitive economically.
HondoFS
-
Then what was your point by saying it's not competitive economically? You do realize that over time with more research and when you scale things is when they get more economically viable. Right?HoustonHusky said:
There is so much stupid in the above where to start? It should be obvious the fly is attracted to the idea of compressed air because it involves hot air...2001400ex said:
It's not competing economically so we should just bag the idea. Imagine if we did that with the first computer or cell phone.HoustonHusky said:There have been a lot of ideas like that...another one I saw was to compress air into underground caverns and then have the compressed air drive turbines when needed.
Not horrible ideas, but hard to pull off at a massive scale and still not competitive economically.
HondoFS -
What is the energy density of natural gas under pressure in a salt dome (i.e. how many btus can be released through burning a cf of stored natural gas)?2001400ex said:
Then what was your point by saying it's not competitive economically? You do realize that over time with more research and when you scale things is when they get more economically viable. Right?HoustonHusky said:
There is so much stupid in the above where to start? It should be obvious the fly is attracted to the idea of compressed air because it involves hot air...2001400ex said:
It's not competing economically so we should just bag the idea. Imagine if we did that with the first computer or cell phone.HoustonHusky said:There have been a lot of ideas like that...another one I saw was to compress air into underground caverns and then have the compressed air drive turbines when needed.
Not horrible ideas, but hard to pull off at a massive scale and still not competitive economically.
HondoFS
What is the energy density of compressed air (including efficiency losses) utilized by running it through a turbine (i.e. how many equivalent btus per cf does it generate)?
Please explain how any amount of research narrows that gap. The laws of physics would love to know.
Or go take your speed limit IQ off and go start another Kavanaugh thread on something you don't 'care about'...
-
You needed all those words to say that fossil fuels are the cheapest available energy source. Nice work Captain obvious.HoustonHusky said:
What is the energy density of natural gas under pressure in a salt dome (i.e. how many btus can be released through burning a cf of stored natural gas)?2001400ex said:
Then what was your point by saying it's not competitive economically? You do realize that over time with more research and when you scale things is when they get more economically viable. Right?HoustonHusky said:
There is so much stupid in the above where to start? It should be obvious the fly is attracted to the idea of compressed air because it involves hot air...2001400ex said:
It's not competing economically so we should just bag the idea. Imagine if we did that with the first computer or cell phone.HoustonHusky said:There have been a lot of ideas like that...another one I saw was to compress air into underground caverns and then have the compressed air drive turbines when needed.
Not horrible ideas, but hard to pull off at a massive scale and still not competitive economically.
HondoFS
What is the energy density of compressed air (including efficiency losses) utilized by running it through a turbine (i.e. how many equivalent btus per cf does it generate)?
Please explain how any amount of research narrows that gap. The laws of physics would love to know.
Or go take your speed limit IQ off and go start another Kavanaugh thread on something you don't 'care about'...
That being said, why are you scared to invest in alternative energy sources? -
Has nothing to do with just being the cheapest moron...has to do with simple energy density. As in orders of magnitude difference. Something your average 5th grader could probably understand, which puts it out of your capabilities...2001400ex said:
You needed all those words to say that fossil fuels are the cheapest available energy source. Nice work Captain obvious.HoustonHusky said:
What is the energy density of natural gas under pressure in a salt dome (i.e. how many btus can be released through burning a cf of stored natural gas)?2001400ex said:
Then what was your point by saying it's not competitive economically? You do realize that over time with more research and when you scale things is when they get more economically viable. Right?HoustonHusky said:
There is so much stupid in the above where to start? It should be obvious the fly is attracted to the idea of compressed air because it involves hot air...2001400ex said:
It's not competing economically so we should just bag the idea. Imagine if we did that with the first computer or cell phone.HoustonHusky said:There have been a lot of ideas like that...another one I saw was to compress air into underground caverns and then have the compressed air drive turbines when needed.
Not horrible ideas, but hard to pull off at a massive scale and still not competitive economically.
HondoFS
What is the energy density of compressed air (including efficiency losses) utilized by running it through a turbine (i.e. how many equivalent btus per cf does it generate)?
Please explain how any amount of research narrows that gap. The laws of physics would love to know.
Or go take your speed limit IQ off and go start another Kavanaugh thread on something you don't 'care about'...
That being said, why are you scared to invest in alternative energy sources?
I have no problem at all with investing...but its HondoFS to invest in ideas that literally have no chance of being competitive. Its FS to spend billions commercializing a technology that even if it approaches its theoretical peak 20 years from now will still not become in any way, shape, or form, an economically viable alternative. You are much better off spending that money on early research intro ideas/technology that at least has a chance.
HondoFS... -
Pumped storage can work in some places. However , hydro currently comprises 6% of the US electrical production. You think you can double that with pumped storage? We have pretty much damned all the prime spots in the US and we aren't building new dams we are tearing them down. No new Grand Coulees or Hoover Dams are out there. I'm happy to support marginal production increases like pumped storage. But the first thing the greens and crony capitalists will tell us is how great this new technology is - cheap and efficient. Then they ask for massive federal subsidies - because it isn't cheap and efficient. Pumping compressed air into a salt dome and then using the pressure to run turbines when power is needed is not advanced technology. It just doesn't pencil out without subsidies or government mandates.
-
Yeah good thing renewable energy never got any government money.........Solyndra much?
-
There's a whopping $500 million. Nice Fox news talking point however.Sledog said:Yeah good thing renewable energy never got any government money.........Solyndra much?
-
Cheap renewable energy isn't the real problem.
Cheap renewable energy storage is the problem.
HTH
