Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: Solutions


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: Solutions

Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 35 · Next
Author Message
Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,797
RAC: 6,729
United States
Message 1385570 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 21:47:58 UTC - in response to Message 1385414.

... Sounds like you don't know squat. All batteries ... 1D...

Yawn... Back to your 1d noise and trolling...

Please simply note that structures and chemistry are 3d + time.

As a teaser: Want to guess how you can make your 1 square inch plate have a surface area of a million square inches or more?... Now charge up that.

Change its shape, but you didn't change its density, so you didn't change the volume it occupies. Think ...

You really do look to play superficial games with words with no deeper understanding. String a few random scientific sounding words together to then glow in word ignorance?...

I'll give you another simple clue: fractals... I hope the Wikipedia words are not too scary to read-and-understand.

I can only think of three things:
1 You have no clue as to what Moore's actually law says. (Hint it is quite narrow compared to what popular media want it to say, it only talks about area.)
2 You have zero understanding of geometry of surfaces and volumes. (Hint Archimedes knew it better.)
3 You intentionally wish to deceive.


____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1387340 - Posted: 3 Jul 2013, 19:20:19 UTC - in response to Message 1385570.
Last modified: 3 Jul 2013, 19:41:08 UTC

... Sounds like you don't know squat. All batteries ... 1D...

Yawn... Back to your 1d noise and trolling...


I'll give you another simple clue: fractals... I hope the Wikipedia words are not too scary to read-and-understand.

I can only think of three things...

3 You intentionally wish to deceive.

Looks like "3" is your game...


To spoon feed your lazy ignorance:

Take a 10mm square flat surface, and assuming that surface is nicely smooth you have a surface area of 10mm x 10mm = 100mm^2

Now pattern that surface with a 1mm checkerboard pattern where the black squares say are 5mm high square columns. That now gives you the same surface area as before of 100mm^2 for the squares but additionally you have 5x 5x 4x 5mm x 1mm = 500mm^2 from the sides of the columns to give you a total surface area of 600mm^2


Battery capacity is directly proportional to surface area for some types of battery.


Going "micro" patterned increases that pattern effect yet further... Keeping to the same aspect ratio and using a 1um grid and a 5um high surface pattern, gives you the same surface area of:

( 100mm^2 ) + ( 5000x 5000x 4x 5um x 1um = 500mm^2 ) = 600mm^2 for that 10mm square plate. However, a further trick is that at those smaller dimensions, you can easily increase the aspect ratio that is patterned to for example 10um x 1um columns to double your surface area to 1100mm^2 for example.

So, lot's more potential there for just 2d. Going '3d' you can get even more drastic increase in active area by using porous electrodes...

There's lots of development possible yet... And also there are better ways other than only 'batteries'...


Where there is an honest will, there is a way...

All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1387346 - Posted: 3 Jul 2013, 19:29:06 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jul 2013, 19:29:26 UTC

A leading light for our planet to help avoid the destruction of our Garden of Eden?


Apple's new data center to be solar powered, 100% green

PR stunt or canny business move? Ask Barack Obama...

... The new photovoltaic power source, to be built in partnership with NV Energy, will pump 43.5 million kilowatt hours per year into the grid that will power the data center, Reuters reports.

That hefty jolt o' juice is comparable to that produced by the 42 million kilowatt hours per year generated by the 100-acre, 20-megawatt solar farm that powers Apple's mega–data center in Maiden, North Carolina. That array, however, is soon to be joined by a second 20-megawatt photovoltaic installation that Apple plans to fire up later this year.

The Maiden data center's solar power is joined by a biogas fuel-cell facility that produces an additional 83 million killowatt hours per year. ...

... The combination of photovoltaic and geothermal power will allow the Reno data center to be powered completely by renewable sources...

... Currently, Apple says, 75 per cent of their corporate facilities are powered by renewable sources, and "We won't stop working until we achieve 100 percent throughout Apple."

Good PR, to be sure, but also good long-term business sense as we enter a period during which – should climate champions and President Obama get their way – increased regulation and oversight of non-renewable energy sources may very well drive up the cost of electricity from CO2-spewing power plants. ...



A bold and welcome early move.

All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,797
RAC: 6,729
United States
Message 1387431 - Posted: 3 Jul 2013, 21:59:13 UTC - in response to Message 1387340.

... Sounds like you don't know squat. All batteries ... 1D...

Yawn... Back to your 1d noise and trolling...


I'll give you another simple clue: fractals... I hope the Wikipedia words are not too scary to read-and-understand.

I can only think of three things...

3 You intentionally wish to deceive.

Looks like "3" is your game...


To spoon feed your lazy ignorance:

Take a 10mm square flat surface

I see your basic ignorance, a battery is not flat. It occupies 3D space. So when you do your transformations what happens to the volume not just of the material in the electrode but the case that surrounds it.

The second part of you ignorance is treating a battery as a capacitor. While a capacitors storage is directly related to surface area, that is not the only factor in a battery. A battery stores energy in chemical change. It has to have chemical to change. How much chemical is in a mathematical plane? Zero! A mathematical plane is too thin for a single atom to exist in. So your hypothetical battery can not work.

You also have several times changed your premise when discussing this. I'll remind you, you started with a given mass of material. You did not understand what you said. As I said you can change the shape of this mass any way you see fit, but you haven't changed how much of it you have or its volume. Depending on how good you are at folding it up, after you change its shape you may have changed the volume of the case you need to enclose it! Which is the point I started with and you fail to understand. Moore's law is about size.

____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1387432 - Posted: 3 Jul 2013, 22:41:04 UTC - in response to Message 1387431.

I see your basic ignorance...

And we all see your word games of trolling and changing the game.

Game over.

The x10 performance of the sulphur-based batteries being developed is already a fact. Other developments continue. Please play troll elsewhere.


We need solutions, not the hot air of trolls and corrupt politicians.

All on our only one planet,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1387606 - Posted: 4 Jul 2013, 13:51:13 UTC
Last modified: 4 Jul 2013, 13:53:17 UTC

A little political tinkering to humour along industry:


MEPs' move to fix EU carbon market praised

The UK government and green groups have welcomed a European Parliament move to rescue the EU's carbon trading scheme, but say deeper reforms are needed...

... The idea is to reduce the current oversupply of allowances, thereby pushing up the carbon price.

Carbon trading gives heavy industry an incentive to cut CO2 emissions, which have been linked to global warming.

The parliament voted on Wednesday to let the Commission delay the auctioning of up to 900 million CO2 allowances.

The plan still has to be agreed with EU governments to take effect, and Poland - heavily dependent on carbon-rich coal - is among several countries that oppose it. ...

... The Greens want the Commission to permanently withdraw at least 1.4 billion allowances this year. ...



All too little, too slow, too late?

All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,797
RAC: 6,729
United States
Message 1387655 - Posted: 4 Jul 2013, 15:23:25 UTC - in response to Message 1387432.

I see your basic ignorance...

And we all see your word games of trolling and changing the game.

If you don't know what you post means, stay out of an engineering thread where specificity is required, go play your fanboy games in your denial thread.

There is work to be done and your noise is preventing it from being done.

____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1388863 - Posted: 8 Jul 2013, 15:01:05 UTC - in response to Message 1387606.
Last modified: 8 Jul 2013, 15:05:04 UTC

A little political tinkering to humour along industry:


MEPs' move to fix EU carbon market praised

The UK government and green groups have welcomed a European Parliament move to rescue the EU's carbon trading scheme, but say deeper reforms are needed...

... The Greens want the Commission to permanently withdraw at least 1.4 billion allowances this year. ...


Not as far as is wanted, but such is the game of politics:


Europe: OK, we'll 'backload' carbon emissions - but we'd better not lose big biz

The European Parliament has voted through proposed temporary reforms to the EU's emissions trading system (EU ETS)...

... The latest proposed reforms will prevent the European Commission from backloading more than the 900 million allowances and from carrying out the backloading exercise more than once. The backloading will also be subject to an impact assessment showing that there is no "significant risk" of businesses relocating outside the EU if the change goes ahead. ...

... the EU carbon market would need more than "one-off measures" to address an "incredibly low carbon price, which currently sits at a level around 70 per cent lower than it was three years ago".

"Many have suggested that what is needed is proper structural change and in particular the removal of a volume of European Union Allowances permanently from the market in light of what is understood to be a significant surplus in allowances,"...



So, "not more than 900 million ('allowances'=tons?) and not more than once..." All too little, too slow, too late?

Anyone any ideas how to visualize what 900 million tons of pencil leads would look like?...


All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8748
Credit: 25,598,119
RAC: 8,933
United Kingdom
Message 1389389 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 6:34:31 UTC

A possibility to keep using coal as a clean energy source.

New Coal Technology Harnesses Energy Without Burning, Nears Pilot-Scale Development

COLUMBUS, Ohio—A new form of clean coal technology reached an important milestone recently, with the successful operation of a research-scale combustion system at Ohio State University. The technology is now ready for testing at a larger scale.

For 203 continuous hours, the Ohio State combustion unit produced heat from coal while capturing 99 percent of the carbon dioxide produced in the reaction.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32331
Credit: 14,275,303
RAC: 8,154
United Kingdom
Message 1389402 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 7:43:59 UTC

So how long would it be before we had a viable coal fired power station in this way? The worlds coal is a finite amount, once its gone its gone. What is currently left is getting harder to extract economically.

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8748
Credit: 25,598,119
RAC: 8,933
United Kingdom
Message 1389407 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 8:05:40 UTC - in response to Message 1389402.

So how long would it be before we had a viable coal fired power station in this way? The worlds coal is a finite amount, once its gone its gone. What is currently left is getting harder to extract economically.


There you have to define "economically", if in xx years the cost of imported coal rises by a significant amount then the UK's coal reserves could become economical again.

I'm pretty sure that I was told, many years ago, when I was at school, we had over 400 years worth of coal below our feet.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32331
Credit: 14,275,303
RAC: 8,154
United Kingdom
Message 1389437 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 10:20:50 UTC

This site has all the figures. Coal Stats

It seems that we have an annual consumption of 64 million tonnes, and estimated reserves of 3.2 billion tonnes. my maths makes that about 50 years worth. And even then that is assuming that the reserves are economic to extract. We currently produce about 17 million tonnes and import about 45 million tonnes. But all this is getting away from the point, we don't want any more coal fired power stations belching smoke into the air. Fossil fuels are not renewable, renewables like wind and solar aren't enough to meet energy demand, about 11% in the UK, therefore looking hundreds of years into the future, nuclear power is the only long term way to go. In 3000 AD there won't be any coal, oil, or gas, so what then except nuclear?

The problem is that the worls hasn't tamed nuclear power yet. We've had Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima. All of which have dented the public's confidence in nuclear power. In each case it was either bad design, operator error, or inappropriate siting. If we can run nuclear submarines that don't need refuelling for 30 years, perfectly safely, why can't we do it on land?

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8748
Credit: 25,598,119
RAC: 8,933
United Kingdom
Message 1389439 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 10:34:32 UTC - in response to Message 1389437.

It is the gap from now until nuclear fusion or some other unknown power source are developed that is the problem. It is not helped when politicians make wild claims for green power, as shown in this article about the claims of Scottish politicians and the facts as detailed by Oxford University engineering study about wave power in the Pentland Firth.

Wave goodbye to hopes of tidal energy exports, Scots politicians told

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32331
Credit: 14,275,303
RAC: 8,154
United Kingdom
Message 1389451 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 12:12:43 UTC

There was some grandiose scheme for the Severn Estuary that never got off the ground.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1389491 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:27:17 UTC - in response to Message 1389439.
Last modified: 10 Jul 2013, 15:52:34 UTC

It is the gap from now until nuclear fusion or some other unknown power source are developed that is the problem. It is not helped when politicians make wild claims for green power, as shown in this article about the claims of Scottish politicians and the facts as detailed by Oxford University engineering study about wave power in the Pentland Firth.

Wave goodbye to hopes of tidal energy exports, Scots politicians told

From that article:

"14GW" previously assumed... That is then reduced to "1.9GW" with the assumption that "Three rows of turbines would be the maximum that could be deployed without seriously eroding the power-generating capacity of the tidal flow".

That looks to be surprisingly pessimistic... Also, only 3 rows of turbines to kill the flow?... I strongly suspect some arbitrary 'minimal value of non-disturbance' has been assumed/used rather than calculating for a much higher maximum energy return which will slow the tidal flow.


Also, this quote looks to be a little suspicious:

"This would produce a power output that could match or exceed that of wind turbines,"

Is that a clever swipe to divert grants/funding?...


Regardless, even with overly pessimistic figures, that still adds up to [about] half of the power used by Scotland.


Good and interesting but a curious angle... Note also that is only one of a number of tidal races around the UK.

All on our only planet,
Martin


[edit]

As usual, detail lost in the journalism... Instead see: Pentland Firth turbines could generate "almost half of Scotland's electricity"

"the researchers assumed that, to be viable, the potential energy generated by each tidal turbine would have to be greater than that of off-shore wind turbines"

So, grabbing 10% of the potential available energy assuming various current economics is perhaps not too unreasonable.

I wonder if the undersea tidal turbines could be combined with above-sea wind turbines on the same fixtures for better economy and power output?...

[edit]
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1389493 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:32:42 UTC - in response to Message 1389451.
Last modified: 10 Jul 2013, 15:34:04 UTC

There was some grandiose scheme for the Severn Estuary that never got off the ground.

That one is always getting sunk by the too-greedy construction consortium wanting a multi-billion guaranteed corrupt gravy train to pour stupid amounts of CO2-costly concrete and the country and environment be damned.

Meanwhile, our money is now to instead be squandered on an ever-expanding "High Speed 2" train line to shave off a few minutes inter-city time for an elite. How can a train line be so expensive and take so long to construct?! All for such little gain...


Meanwhile, the same money could either fund discrete tidal stream turbines around the whole of the UK, no monstrous mega-barrage needed. Or, speed up the development of Fusion power...


It's all our choice...

All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1389495 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:39:32 UTC - in response to Message 1389389.
Last modified: 10 Jul 2013, 15:40:56 UTC

A possibility to keep using coal as a clean energy source.

New Coal Technology Harnesses Energy Without Burning, Nears Pilot-Scale Development

COLUMBUS, Ohio—A new form of clean coal technology reached an important milestone recently, with the successful operation of a research-scale combustion system at Ohio State University. The technology is now ready for testing at a larger scale.

For 203 continuous hours, the Ohio State combustion unit produced heat from coal while capturing 99 percent of the carbon dioxide produced in the reaction.

Thanks for that. Looks to be developing nicely.


I wonder if that can come into play before and instead of the next round of dirty old tech is allowed in for the rushed next round of replacing old coal power in UK?... There's a lot of current old coal spluttering along beyond end of life... And predictably the power industry is ramping up the rhetoric of "the lights will go out, so lets build anything dirty quick"...


All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1389498 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:43:54 UTC
Last modified: 10 Jul 2013, 15:44:23 UTC

Coal is natural but dug up by us.

So the below is or isn't natural? And what pumps out more Co2?


____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1389501 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:45:52 UTC

Please give real answers.
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 4004
Credit: 2,055,322
RAC: 478
United Kingdom
Message 1389507 - Posted: 10 Jul 2013, 15:59:03 UTC
Last modified: 10 Jul 2013, 16:02:12 UTC

Meanwhile, our money is now to instead be squandered on an ever-expanding "High Speed 2" train line to shave off a few minutes inter-city time for an elite. How can a train line be so expensive and take so long to construct?! All for such little gain...

Being kind here a bit aren't you Martin?...don't you mean, "Ruddy wasted"
Some Europeans countries, including France, are dropping any further plans to
extend their High Speed train networks. Reason being that advances in communications
technology will render long distance HS travel unnecessary. HS2 wont go ahead, we
can't afford the £100 billion price tag that this whole project is now going to
cost.
____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 35 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: Solutions

Copyright © 2014 University of California