hh5 Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 * Why not solarize the entire Sahara Desert? * Solar Heated Water to power steam electric generators Absorb as much solar heat to cut out the neg effects of deserts * How about Solarize North and South Pole? Melting issue? * Geothermal like crazy ... take yellow stone and create a G-Plant? * Thermal coupling .. the extreme changes from hot to cold or cold to hot ... to generate electicity * Giant Solar array (like a kite) in geo sync orbit ... have SpaceX rockets bring up giant capacitors to be changed out and brought back to earth rather than microwave energy transmission * If we have all these generators all over the planet (discounting any restrictions or any other neg concerns) Wind, Solar, Wave ... What would happen? Would the earth slow down? Would Europe Freeze? * There is a kite wind turbine where electric is x-mit down the cable to the ground. Imagine a lot of these in the skies .. we have air space issues with planes * If we build a lot of Masdar Type cities, wouldn't we start to look like the BORG?? Anyone got any crazy idea questions?
Mark92 Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 I rely on a wind turbine for my electricty. I am just too far away from any other energy source. My outside lighting is all solar powered but not by any solar panels up on a roof. But by small little squares they have on them. My fuel is from my sustainable wood.I dont even have a telephone line. The cost is just more than I am, willing to pay. So I either constantly lose signal or I run up my horseshoe of hills and get a better signal via the airbase next door. They provide me with free internet and global television coverage. I believe in green energy. I dont know if I would agree to windfarms on every acre of land or wavepower in our surrounding sea. There is a happy medium to everything and we need to find a solution that doesnt cost Mother Nature.
Zolia Lily Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 Problem is that a lot of "green" solutions aren't perfect. Solar Panels contain something pretty toxic, nuclear power again produces some baaaad waste that no one really wants to have to deal with AND uses a whole lot of water that could be better used elsewhere... And destroying Yellowstone in pursuit of a fuel source which is supposed to save the environment is kind of a huge irony right there.... not to mention the costs of implementing any of these scenarios... Not saying we shouldn't be looking at green alternatives - just that the costs are sometimes prohibitive and there are lots of factors to take into account. And, lets face it, any government in power is really only concerned with short term goals that will get them re-elected, which leaves us with the idea that consumer groups are apparently supposed to be driving the green revolution... but then there's so much ignorance and apathy out there and change is so SLOW... I dunno. I kind of see the world ending pretty soon.....
Cyhort Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 The best, and cheapest, non fossil fuel is natural gas. There's no expensive equipment to build and maintain like wind turbines or solar panals, there's no radioactive waste to get rid of like with Nuclear (although nuclear actually is one of the safest energy sources we have these days, statistically) and we already have a lot of it in this country. The problem is idiot environmentalists block every effort to drill for it because "oh no! Drilling is teh badness!1!!!!1!111!" But none of it is gonna come overnight. We're gonna be using gas and oil and coal for a long time. Which is perfectly fine since I've yet to see a legit study saying that the Earth is anywhere near dying because of fossil fuels.
Celethiel Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 Natural gas is a fossil fuel, as is coal more or less. The natural gas we're currently using comes with Oil. Methane doesn't... They build over 100 windmills near where i live. >_> to ship the power to california. Destroying Yellowstone isn't the only issue, what happens if in this persuit you cause Yellowstone to irrupt. The Sahara is unstable with as much sand as it has, one day you'd have solar panels the next they'd be burried in sand, a lot of it. To the North and South Poles... that's pratically impossible as they only get sunlight for 3 months a year, and the rest is blowing snow and Ice, and the dark... And the space station idea, one problem Political and monetary support... Very few with money care, and those in government care even less... thus no money... not sure what you mean about Masdar type cities... the Thermal coupling would work in such areas as Montana where it turned from hot to very cold... if you use it like what happens to your sidewalks... yeah.... however requires.... money and research...
Y_B Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 Solarize my friggin yard in July and there'll enough to power everything inside forever....
Zombie Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 I've yet to see a legit study saying that the Earth is anywhere near dying because of fossil fuels. Don't think you will because the Earth will still be around whatever we do. The question is whether the conditions on Earth necessary to support human life will continue, i.e. will the Earth remain a "Goldilocks Planet"? (which it has not been for most of its life according to the the geological record). If not then that would be the end of human life on Earth as we know it today, or maybe altogether. But the Earth would continue just fine without us. And it's a dynamic planet so maybe it would once again become a Goldilocks Planet for another species to enjoy
Celethiel Posted May 25, 2012 Posted May 25, 2012 Don't think you will because the Earth will still be around whatever we do. The question is whether the conditions on Earth necessary to support human life will continue, i.e. will the Earth remain a "Goldilocks Planet"? (which it has not been for most of its life according to the the geological record). If not then that would be the end of human life on Earth as we know it today, or maybe altogether. But the Earth would continue just fine without us. And it's a dynamic planet so maybe it would once again become a Goldilocks Planet for another species to enjoy or it could be a goldilocks planet... just not for humans....just because we can no longer support ourselves on a planet don't mean other life won't be able to continue to exist...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now