Re: OT: How a Flawed 2004 S.E.C. Decision Contributed to Present Morass

FL Turbo wrote:

I wasn't a political junkie during the time of Carter, so I wasn't
aware of most of the Inside Politics at that time.

I do remember his famous "malaise" speech (He of course, never used
that term, but whatever).

Most of what I got out of that was him sitting in a sweater, telling
Americans that we had to conserve, conserve, conserve.

Set the thermostat down a few degrees.
Turn out the lights.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Actually, I grew up in an era where any kid that walked out of a room
without turning the lights out would get yelled at.

But I digress.

Conservation of energy is just fine.
In fact, we have been doing that all along.

Housing codes that mandate more insulation, and mandate maximum
lighting levels in commercial buildings.

Energy efficiency standards for motors, air conditioners, appliances,
lighting fixtures; you name it.
Computer controlled ignition systems for cars that squeeze every
little bit of efficiency out of the internal combustion engine.

Energy efficiency is just fine, but it has its limits.
Contrary to Obama, keeping our tires inflated just does not substitute
for going after more energy sources.

A growing economy just can't simply rely on conservation alone.

Now, Carter may have had some initiatives about going after more
sources of energy, but I don't remember any.

Actually, Carter was touted as a "nucular" engineer because of his
days in the Navy, being selected by Hyman Rickover for the nuclear
submarine program.
(Yes, he pronounced it "nucular". Personally I think it's a Southern
thing.)

If someone had successfully promoted more nuclear power plants since
then, I think that we wouldn't be in nearly as bad a shape as we are
in now.

I don't know exactly when Jane Fonda made her reputation for The China
Syndrome that scared the shit out of the populace about nuclear power.
Probably after Carter?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes
on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other
countries are going to say OK," Obama said.


Deja Vu all over again.

You know, FL, this might surprise you, but I'm in pretty complete agreement with the points you made above. Nuclear power was/is the victim of poor PR. Conservation is good in terms of, say, creating appliances that are more energy efficient. However, when the green folks start talking about throwing up solar panels and running off that... well, they are generally assuming we'll give up our dryers (line dry) dishwashers (do by hand), vacuums, etc... I'll tell you, neither I nor my wife are willing to give up such helpful time-savers.

The key is abundance... we can't go backwards. New sources must be found, or existing sources must be maximized.

There is a really interesting new "breed" of solar collector. Basically, it uses reflectors instead of solar panels to concentrate light/heat to a central point, where a device turns that heat into energy. I think this is very promising. I also think the new plasma waste processors are going to be big, although the former promises a way off the grid, the later simply a new grid-based source.

Anyhow, here's something about those new solar collectors:

http://www.stirlingenergy.com/

This is an interesting bit about inventor Lonnie Johnson (sidenote: holds 100+ patents, but best known invention is the SuperSoaker, which was actually a result of another invention, a fridge that ran on water instead of Freon):

http://www.johnsonems.com/jhtec.html

This thing is an entirely new method of turning heat into electricity, and is said to be nearly twice as efficient as current methods.

Stuff is out there. We'll get there, I'm sure... my brother insists that this is the way out of the current economic... slump... of course, I don't like what he's proposing, that the government make all kinds of requirements of us that will force us to go green... but, we'll see.

Cheers.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [OT] Paging Frank K. (was: Re: [OT] Why Bush?)
    ... >> community when we start to replace dirty energy by clean energy. ... > 1) Solar Panels do not come from the vacuum. ... associated with _ANY_ type of industrial production... ... currently pumping water out of the water table (and also, ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Retartded!!!!
    ... Heavy metals are rarely used in this day and age ... But there IS Cadmium in solar panels. ... Wind energy does not. ... been destroyed by environmentalists. ...
    (rec.roller-coaster)
  • H.R. 2454 (Cap and trade bill)
    ... Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Act, ... you will have to have the energy efficiency of your ... EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every year, ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: footprints
    ... about the energy expended to produce solar panels. ... it seems to me that direct conversion of sunlight into ... Wind power, which depends on very mature technologies....metallurgy, ...
    (rec.outdoors.fishing.fly)
  • Re: Bankrupt america will requires a LICENSE for your home
    ... Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, ... To get this permission,you will have to have the energy efficiency of your ... 204 Building Energy Performance Labeling Program ...
    (alt.religion.islam)