Coal-powered airplane

Lawman said:
Some of us lived in Germany and got to watch hysterical populist fear and a weird form of environmentalism crush the most effective and quickest way to carbon neutrality in power generation.

End result of the cost benefit analysis of all Nuclear power and it’s possible future development vs “OMG did you watch Chernobyl/Fukushima!” Is Germany has begun burning more Coal because it could neither upscale Renewable (fashionable) energy sources nor does it have the physical infrastructure to use all that it generates. Never mind the even uglier geopolitical issue that comes from being beholden to a rival foreign power on energy imports and what that gives up in political capital.

Watching Environmentalist lobby groups rail against any pursuit of Nuclear energy is like watching a Marathon runner tie their shoe laces together before the race starts.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I get that all for sure.

I just find it a little amusing that you were criticizing “scientific populism” while using the term “dead dinosaurs”.
 
zmiller4 said:
I get that all for sure.

I just find it a little amusing that you were criticizing “scientific populism” while using the term “dead dinosaurs”.
Click to expand...

Oh that was bad humor. Same as my tongue in cheek advocacy for a “sustainable/renewable” energy form. Though I do love watching the 90s show Dinosaurs with my kids, and realizing everybody is named after Petrochemical companies (minus something really obvious like Exxon).

arkflyr said:
There is a whole click of EV drivers that are based in DEN that fly for the redneck airline, I’d be one to if I still lived down there. There just isn’t the infrastructure available and the distances too far for me to make it work here in Montana.
Click to expand...

It’s a matter of time, which is something I don’t think people are willing to wait on.

It took half a trillion dollars (today’s value) and 10 years to build what became the interstate system. And that was with the very recent memories of a World War and how badly our physical infrastructure complicated our mobilization. Even with all that money and effort though today there are still plenty of parts of the western US where if you closed just a handful of gas stations you would create a real problem trying to just go from point A to point B without a real deliberate amount of brain power dedicated to planning, so I think realistically we are still a good bit from EV money and infrastructure achieving the kind of self sustaining cycle where they truly replace the internal combustion engine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
To be clear about MT, there is EV charging up here as long as you don’t venture too far off the interstate and stay local in the bigger cities, Billings, Bozeman, and Missoula. But for me my in-laws ranch is really remote and accessed by 20 miles of dirt and gravel county road. A small SUV can make it out there if it is dry but it still puts a hurting on a vehicle.

Funny sidebar to that, we just got back from the ranch yesterday and had taken my wife’s CR-V out there. I discovered that the automatic collision avoidance braking does not like cattle guard/auto gates in certain circumstances. I’m not sure if it was the hill we were on or the contrast with the gravel and metal but it slammed on the brakes just as we were approaching it. My three year old thought it was hilarious.
 
Lawman said:
Some of us lived in Germany and got to watch hysterical populist fear and a weird form of environmentalism crush the most effective and quickest way to carbon neutrality in power generation.

End result of the cost benefit analysis of all Nuclear power and it’s possible future development vs “OMG did you watch Chernobyl/Fukushima!” Is Germany has begun burning more Coal because it could neither upscale Renewable (fashionable) energy sources nor does it have the physical infrastructure to use all that it generates. Never mind the even uglier geopolitical issue that comes from being beholden to a rival foreign power on energy imports and what that gives up in political capital.

Watching Environmentalist lobby groups rail against any pursuit of Nuclear energy is like watching a Marathon runner tie their shoe laces together before the race starts.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nuclear power is not financially viable.
Period.
It takes decades to bring online and creates wastes that lasts forever, costs more that solar electric without even including long term storage AND eventual decommissioning.
They are never a good idea.
Thorium reactors and breeder reactors and fusion reactors are all fantasy

You show me a system that is simple, safe, without waste, AND cheaper than solar/wind/battery and I'll listen.

But that system doesn't exist. That system won't exist. Because it's pure fantasy.

Just like "clean coal" and the "Hydrogen Economy"
 
DropTank said:
Nuclear power is not financially viable.
Period.
It takes decades to bring online and creates wastes that lasts forever, costs more that solar electric without even including long term storage AND eventual decommissioning.
They are never a good idea.
Thorium reactors and breeder reactors and fusion reactors are all fantasy

You show me a system that is simple, safe, without waste, AND cheaper than solar/wind/battery and I'll listen.

But that system doesn't exist. That system won't exist. Because it's pure fantasy.

Just like "clean coal" and the "Hydrogen Economy"
Click to expand...

@zmiller



I especially like the “without waste” part of Solar/Wind/Battery…. Jesus.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lawman said:
@zmiller



I especially like the “without waste” part of Solar/Wind/Battery…. Jesus.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not sure why you’re tagging me?

I don’t have an any inherent problem with nuclear energy.

And I think this is one of the most astute things posted in this thread:

Lawman said:
It’s a matter of time, which is something I don’t think people are willing to wait on.

It took half a trillion dollars (today’s value) and 10 years to build what became the interstate system. And that was with the very recent memories of a World War and how badly our physical infrastructure complicated our mobilization. Even with all that money and effort though today there are still plenty of parts of the western US where if you closed just a handful of gas stations you would create a real problem trying to just go from point A to point B without a real deliberate amount of brain power dedicated to planning, so I think realistically we are still a good bit from EV money and infrastructure achieving the kind of self sustaining cycle where they truly replace the internal combustion engine.
Click to expand...

I feel like the problem now is there’s not a middle ground between “all hydrocarbons are the devil and must be terminated immediately” and “• you, climate change is a hoax, coal is king!”.

I know there’s issues with waste in wind energy, and I couldn’t begin to compare that to nuclear waste. And inherently widespread wind usage is going to jack up climate, bird migration, etc.

My current, relatively uninformed thought is that geothermal is the path forward. The planet has *so much* energy stored in it that we couldn’t begin to use enough to have any kind of effect on it. There’s all sorts of geologic and engineering complexity involved, but if there was a similar investment in geothermal technology and infrastructure that there was in nuclear power, I would guess that it would be fantastic option moving forward.

But putting money into something now that won’t see returns for years isn’t what the investment community likes to do now, and 40% of the country is convinced that coal, oil and gas are the way of the future so the government is pretty handcuffed.
 
zmiller4 said:
Not sure why you’re tagging me?

I don’t have an any inherent problem with nuclear energy.

And I think this is one of the most astute things posted in this thread:



I feel like the problem now is there’s not a middle ground between “all hydrocarbons are the devil and must be terminated immediately” and “• you, climate change is a hoax, coal is king!”.

I know there’s issues with waste in wind energy, and I couldn’t begin to compare that to nuclear waste. And inherently widespread wind usage is going to jack up climate, bird migration, etc.

My current, relatively uninformed thought is that geothermal is the path forward. The planet has *so much* energy stored in it that we couldn’t begin to use enough to have any kind of effect on it. There’s all sorts of geologic and engineering complexity involved, but if there was a similar investment in geothermal technology and infrastructure that there was in nuclear power, I would guess that it would be fantastic option moving forward.

But putting money into something now that won’t see returns for years isn’t what the investment community likes to do now, and 40% of the country is convinced that coal, oil and gas are the way of the future so the government is pretty handcuffed.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t you being tagged to be all “see told you so” or anything, it was you being tagged to the literal textbook example I had previously made of irrational fear and populist common junk in regards to Nuclear.

It’s like if you bring up Nuclear as a way forward it rings a bell somewhere and somebody has to come in with the same tired but popular myths about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
fholbert said:
Do you remember Trump‘s speech at the UN?
Click to expand...
I do, I heard this speech is the one that caused protesters to gather in the Jefferson Square Park area of Louisville, as well as many other cities in the United States, including Los Angeles, Dallas, Minneapolis, New York, Chicago, Seattle. MASSIVE display of insurrection!! :sarcasm:
 
zmiller4 said:
I know there’s issues with waste in wind energy, and I couldn’t begin to compare that to nuclear waste. And inherently widespread wind usage is going to jack up climate, bird migration, etc.
Click to expand...

What's this waste you're talking about?
Is it the unicorn dust? (it's the unicorn dust isn't it)

And exactly how does it "jack up the environment"?
Use big words this time.

And where have we shown that it hurts bird migration?
Or are you saying wind generators kill birds?
The bigger ones kill fewer birds.

Also, cats kill 1000 times more birds per year than wind generators.

So if birds are really REALLY in your circle of concern, you should spay/neuter your cats.
 
I’ve found that some of the claims attached to solar and wind somewhat tenuous. You have to pick apart the data and that was extra hard when there were subsidies attached, because you had to strip out some of the baked-in incentives.

The other problem is some industries are simply VERY energy intensive, and you’ll never get what you need from wind or solar. Aluminum processing, for example is ridiculously power intensive, which is why you see most plants next to cheap sources of power, mostly hydro.

As for common uses? We’ve a ways to go yet, and for aviation the answer may be never, or least until GM invents the fusion engine.
 
DropTank said:
What's this waste you're talking about?
Is it the unicorn dust? (it's the unicorn dust isn't it)
Click to expand...
The blades are fiberglass and life limited. They can't be recycled so they're being chopped up and stacked up into what are basically landfills. They aren't biodegradable so I don't know what the plan is but they're still piling up.
 
knot4u said:
The blades are fiberglass and life limited. They can't be recycled so they're being chopped up and stacked up into what are basically landfills. They aren't biodegradable so I don't know what the plan is but they're still piling up.
Click to expand...
Oh that’s totally just like highly radioactive waste that is lethal for over a million years.
 
Fixtur said:
Oh that’s totally just like highly radioactive waste that is lethal for over a million years.
Click to expand...
No, admittedly it's not. But the amount of power generated during the life of those rods is far greater than the amount produced by those blades over eithers lifetime. At least we have some sort of storage plan for the nuclear stuff, the blades are just being cut up and stacked up in random fields around the globe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top