Energy to help our ecological crisis?

[Tanemon]

OrganicBorn, thanks for that last link. The photoelectrolysis principle sounds very promising for the very sunny, long-season regions of the world. Southern Canada (where I am) is probably too far north.

[organic born]

Originally Posted by Tanemon

OrganicBorn, thanks for that last link. The photoelectrolysis principle sounds very promising for the very sunny, long-season regions of the world. Southern Canada (where I am) is probably too far north.

Not exactly. :)


This from the Canadian Wildlife Federation:
http://cwf-fcf.org/en/discover-wildl...are-solar.html

"As it turns out, despite our northern location, Canada, too, receives enough solar radiation to make powering PV panels a worthwhile option for homeowners. Most of Canada receives at least seven megajoules of sunlight each day — that's enough to supply an average household's power requirement of about 2,000 watt hours from one 200-watt PV panel!"

[Tanemon]

The annual and average-sunlight data is no doubt correct. But I mean, if the Arctic offers an extreme example of how little sunlight is received during the deep winter months (virtually none, in the mid Arctic), then dial that back a bit and you understand how it is even for southern Canada in winter. The hot spot on the map is shown to be in the south of "the Prairie Provinces) - roughly 700 miles to the east of where I am. That's the center of Canada's grain growing region. Out there, perhaps if you could "make hay while the sun shines" (make & store very large amounts of hydrogen, that is) it could work out. It's as yet an unproven idea.

I don't close my mind - I look for further information... which can take years to emerge.

From a slightly different angle, this situation is exemplified in a small way by a couple of my friends who have taken the plunge and invested in solar equipment for: a) household electrical energy, and b) hot-air (convection) or hot-fluid supplemental water or space heating. With the set-ups being installed in the warmer seasons, initial results look encouraging - but that all dwindles in the shoulder seasons, and definitely stops during winter. The investment in equipment has been considerable and the "payback period" for it is proving to be aggravatingly lengthy (15-20 years). Very expensive and, so far, disappointing experiments. Few people have money to burn.

[organic born]

Originally Posted by Tanemon

From a slightly different angle, this situation is exemplified in a small way by a couple of my friends who have taken the plunge and invested in solar equipment for: a) household electrical energy, and b) hot-air (convection) or hot-fluid supplemental water or space heating. With the set-ups being installed in the warmer seasons, initial results look encouraging - but that all dwindles in the shoulder seasons, and definitely stops during winter. The investment in equipment has been considerable and the "payback period" for it is proving to be aggravatingly lengthy (15-20 years). Very expensive and, so far, disappointing experiments. Few people have money to burn.

I easily agree with you on this point! I've been looking into solar power for a home for a number of years now and there's no way I'd take the investment plunge at this point, based on the current technological options! A person would have to be living in an area with very expensive electricity in order to justify such an investment. Your area is likely supplied by hydro electric which is perhaps the cheapest power available for bulk consumption!

There is a strategy that does work with solar that those who take the plunge tend to benefit from, but you would have to live in an area where the power companies support this type of strategy. It requires electric meters that are capable of running backwards, so during the summer months, when solar is at it's peak, and with a grid tie system, you spin your meters backwards banking the kilowatts that are then used during the leaner winter months. If done properly the power bill should be close to nil for the year. Some areas will even pay for excess power fed back into the grid but those seem to be few and far in between.

It's clear at this point that it's better to wait for the technology to improve in terms of efficiency and cost before moving into a full solar based system for the entire home!

[Tanemon]

Initially, in the opening post, I said:

Originally Posted by Tanemon

This isn’t necessarily a spirituality-related question, but I thought that since the science-minded people who post on this forum tend to have open minds, maybe some of you could help me with this.

And Organic Born rightly mentioned...

Originally Posted by organic born

It's become apparent over time that it's all spiritual, every bit of everything has a spiritual presence simply by the fact that it exists at all. We currently live on a physically defined plane, being channeled through bodies that rely on senses as an interface with this "version" of reality.

And still, my basic question is about...

Originally Posted by Tanemon

the dismal ecological reality we humans have created on our planet, Earth. Many of our issues relate to providing power for buildings or for machinery (including planes, ships, factories, trains, trucks, cars, etc).

I’ve been interested in progress in the fields of energy-conservation and co-generation. But it’s clear that the use of modern technology is spreading so rapidly around the world that sophisticated conservation isn’t enough. It’s obvious we need to derive energy in “greener” ways. A few years back people directed me to PESwiki http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page as a source for information about extreme-efficiency and over-unity devices, both prototyped and developmental. It can be fun to look and read there, but lot of what’s presented is kinda flakey, it seems. Prototypes are presented and explained, but rarely seem to go on to more promising stages. Unless I’m wrong, very few if any devices have gone into commercial production.

Some interesting opinions have been shared. Thanks to those who posted. But...

Originally Posted by Tanemon

Where should I go on the Web for more solid, reliable info?

[knightofalbion]

We clearly need to get away from fossil fuels, and nuclear too, which whilst it has its value (for providing energy) always has its risks.

We need a renewable energy source, and one which is accessible to all people - freely. Think how the world would be transformed if this could be ...

[organic born]

Originally Posted by knightofalbion

We need a renewable energy source, and one which is accessible to all people - freely. Think how the world would be transformed if this could be ...

The world would be transformed but not in the best interest of so many corporations and support businesses that have build their whole futures around maintaining the status quo. The internal combustion engine is pretty much everything. The fuel delivery system is woven throughout the entire structure of transportation. The transition to another system would be awkward and ugly. I fully agree that we need to make that shift in energy use but so many are voting against it with their dollars.

Same holds true with the medical industry. If everyone were to eat a whole foods diet, while eliminating the massive amount of process carbs, then not only would much of the processed food industry collapse but so would the medical franchises.

We have wrapped ourselves intensely around a dysfunctional host of options. With the kinds of change, on the scale that's needed, comes a lot of painful transitional disruption. In order to live "intelligently" perhaps 80 to 90 percent of what we're looking at today would likely need changing. Out of the ashes would certainly come a much better set of options, but there would still need to be the blast furnace of change that proceeded it.

[Tanemon]

Good points, O.B. My fantasy is this: new motive power (indeed, energy for all sorts of things, not just transport & geared commercial/industrial machinery) could take off very quickly in high-population nations like China and India, where petrol, cars & trucks, tractors, etc and the infrastructure that supports these are not nearly as prevalent. The vested interests in those countries are a much smaller proportion of the population. These Asian countries could set the example... embarrassment at being "left behind" might become the motivator in 'the developed world'.

I'm not pretending there would be no resistance, though.

[organic born]

Originally Posted by Tanemon

Good points, O.B. My fantasy is this: new motive power (indeed, energy for all sorts of things, not just transport & geared commercial/industrial machinery) could take off very quickly in high-population nations like China and India, where petrol, cars & trucks, tractors, etc and the infrastructure that supports these are not nearly as prevalent. The vested interests in those countries are a much smaller proportion of the population. These Asian countries could set the example... embarrassment at being "left behind" might become the motivator in 'the developed world'.

I'm not pretending there would be no resistance, though.

When it comes to money I'm not sure being embarrassed generally carries much weight. :)

I like the idea but the newer technologies tend to be comparatively expensive, making it more viable for the more richer cultures to adopt as a boutique way of living. Electric/gas hybrid cars cost very little to run but we need to pony-up between 30 to 40 thousand dollars (US) for the privilege of driving the cheapest most versions. In the mean time china is so eager to grow at an unsustainable rate that they have been willing to let their production related cities to devolve into some of the most polluted places on the planet. The countries with the least want to join the countries with the most and seem willing to take the most direct (and the dirtiest) route in order to get there as soon as they can.

As synchronicity would have it I just ran across a book that is thinking about the subject of future energy sources, and what converting to an energy efficient life style may entail and actually look like.
It's entitled "Our Renewable Future: Laying the path for One Hundred Percent Clean Energy" authors Richard Heinberg and David Fridley. published 2016. You can find a free sample for the kindle on amazon.

I'm just starting the read, still on the introduction, but so far it promises to be an interesting ride. They've already ruled out fossil fuels and nuclear energy as futuristic options and don't see much hope for fusion in the near and somewhat distant future. They're going with the classics; solar, wind, hydro and geothermal as well as a general nod toward the research on hydrogen.

The wasteful way that we currently use energy will have to change of course. One thing seems certain, as fossil fuels diminish the alternatives will likely involve strategies-of-necessity that would alter how we interact with planet earth.

[Tanemon]

I'll check it out. Heinberg is someone whose ideas I've come across before.

But here's a further thought on China... Yes, I realize their leap into capitalism - more particularly what we might call 'state capitalism' - has been a dirty business, ecologically. However, both the government and the managerial class, as well as ordinary citizens, are quite aware of the pollution problems. They've been striving for modernization and pollution is the very unfortunate byproduct.

China, as I'm sure you realize, was historically a hotbed for the development of technologies, and some Western scholars assert China was technologically ahead of Europe (European cultures) for many centuries. As a people, the Chinese are practical, resourceful, creative, and capable of intense dedication and focus. Their current severe pollution problems may spur innovative 21st-century technological advancement. And my guess is the Chinese government will push the research ahead.

While petroleum, coal, and fission interests in the West will surely maneuver to hold their places, possibly the larger societies of the less-developed East will bypass our outworn technologies. I'd think they have little to lose and much to gain by doing so. China and Japan would probably lead, with India possibly making a creative contribution once in a while.