Hammer Smokin'

Members
  • Content Count

    197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

About Hammer Smokin'

  • Rank
    Campanas

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. and don't forget, you can generate, and store the power that can be used to charge the Tesla for free (aside from cost of equipment). a benefit that currently no other vehicle can offer. generation of your own "fuel".
  2. Well, through my experience, at least currently, I see no solution to move away from base line power production of nuclear. But you are correct. With the current spent waste, we are kinda robbing peter to pay paul. I just am not aware of any alternate solutions. I'm very sure they are out there, and are likely being worked on, but nuclear is the area with my most minimal involvement. Having a hand in all other forms of power production, carbon based, or renewable, even the biggest tree huggers admit nuclear is a must to keep a healthy power grid functioning. Bruce Nuclear here in Ontario is a pretty good example of a well run nuclear facility. Much better than the government run Ontario Power Generation facilities. And for the most part, they pay better than coal or gas based facilities, so workers contribute strongly to all three levels of government. While I'm all for moving away from carbon based power production, at this time, in order to do so, nuclear is more important than ever.
  3. wind farms are often in more remote/rural areas, but solar facilities are built directly within existing infrastructures, as are hydro electric facilties. Just in the city of Toronto there is over 3,500 operating rooftop solar arrays. Smart grid technology will improve the transfer of energy. Solar is the best option for "local" power production. Some of the tests for the gravity storage is being done underground, which could be incorporated into cities for local power storage. yes I did read the article you posted. I believe that is where your 20 times is coming from. That is comparing solar to nuclear. No educated person will ever argue that solar is more efficient than nuclear. But if you take the same comparison with coal or gas, that number gets thrown out the window. Nuclear will never ever go away. Nor should it. But 100% of carbon based power could be replaced with Renewable Forms already. I like to try to keep these discussions away from Nuclear, because nuclear is the ultimate form of power production. Nothing (at least that we are currently aware of) will ever be able to replace it. But a healthy grid will use a base load of nuclear and supplement with the best form of RE available at the specific grid, whether that be wind, solar, hydroelectric, or even bioenergy. good discussion. I've enjoyed it. But I need to get up in 4.5 hours for my fishing trip. So I'll check back this thread tomorrow. Cheers,
  4. No, most of a panel is not recyclable, just like a TV. But TV's are in every household, multiplied by 2 or 3, and replaced every few years. That was my point. I've been part of large scale storage solutions that include taking produced power and turning it into kinetic energy. These include using energy to transfer water from a low point to a high point and cap it. When you want the energy again, you release the "cap" and allow it to fall, using gravity. Once falling, it turns a turbine. So the power is transferred through the use of pumps, then held, and released. A 2nd option is the opposite. I've been part of projects that use motors on the bottom of a lake. The take a balloon like structure and using power then pull down an inflated balloon to the bottom. It then is "held" on the bottom. When the power is needed they release the balloon to float to the surface. In doing so, chains turn a turbine while the balloon is raising, regenerating the power. Both of these options are examples of storage of energy without any form of battery. Then there is a really cool thing that I've not actually been part of, but it is being looked at. Essentially an oversized elastic (for lack of better term) is wound up and locked. When release, again, turns a turbine. No mining or rare elements involved in any of the above energy storage methods. Finally, your question on techs. While wind turbines need millwrights for the upkeep and maintenance, not nearly the amount that a coal facility or gas power facility employ's on a daily basis. Solar farms have no moving parts. Once installed, they require so little maintenance and upkeep it is actually startling. They are by far the cheapest form of energy production, well below any form of carbon based energy. They need very little replacement, and are quite durable. Wind farms need more, and costs are higher. Hydro Electric sits in the middle. Again, the biggest challenge of moving away from carbon based power is all the workers employed in the carbon based facilities. The tradesman can be re-employed in alternate industries, but the "operators" cannot. That is the challenge. What do you do with hundreds (or in a big country like Canada or USA), thousands of employees no longer needed. Much of the incorrect information spread on renewable's is done from companies or employees who will no longer be needed or employed if carbon based production is reduced. That is a real problem. And again, might be a bigger problem than the benefits (environment, safety) generated by Renewable Energy. Just the elimination of the various federal subsidies currently in place for carbon based power (again, nuclear is here to stay, forever) will offset increased costs for RE power production. Hope this helps build your knowledge on the future of both production of power as well as storage of power. If not, that's cool too. The future cannot be stopped.
  5. with all due respect, you make a large number of mistakes in your post. I work directly with solar farms, wind farms, hydroelectric facilities, as well as traditional coal, gas, and nuclear. To suggest a nuclear, coal, or gas facility requires less service and techs to keep the power running than solar, is, well, extremely incorrect. And if you had any idea the amount of dollars (billions) being invested in storage of energy, you'd change your tune about time of day production. The safety and reliability of solar and hydro electric power is substantially better than coal, gas, or nuclear (nuclear will always be present, and will always be the "base load" for any modern power grid). Solar panels are as recyclable as TV's. Every house hold has TV's, and often replace them every few years. There are literally millions of TV"s that have been discarded, and we seem to be handling that waste. In 10+ years any modern energy grid will consist of nuclear + Renewable Energy (and what RE will depend on the geographic location). Here in Canada we have TONS of land for solar and wind farms, as well as tons of water for hydro electric. We could remove all carbon based power production in less than 5 years if it wasn't for the jobs they generate. I'll be honest, that is one of the real reasons it hasn't happened sooner. Solar Farms and Wind Farms operate without "operators". I'm not sure if you are familiar with the costs associated (human costs) in running carbon based power facilities. Jobs pay well above average, and employ many people who do not have transferable skills. We have 500MW solar farms operate with little no maintenance (aside from the Transformer/Substation maintenance), and can operate with an employee base of less than 10 operators. The real issue many have is they see the jobs generated by carbon based power production being removed...and that might be worse for the economy than the benefit of the RE power production. (and that is an entirely different discussion. do we remove high paying jobs from the economy in order to generate cleaner energy.....)
  6. the generation of clean power is already here. it is the storage of the clean power that is being worked on/invested/improved on. I've been part of some amazing projects that store energy without any lithium or traditional battery sources. There is billions being invested in storage of energy. The generation of the power is already here, and it already quite efficient (especially solar, wind, hydro electric, and bio). Where we are going to see remarkable advancements is in how the power is stored. Some of the ideas I've read have blown my mind. Yes, they are just ideas, but HUGE companies are pouring massive amount of money into making these ideas real. Starting to see some prototypical energy storage methods that are so easy, I can't believe they weren't thought of sooner. Just none are available in "small scale" ... yet.
  7. generating renewable energy without dirty carbons is not a fad, it is the future.
  8. can a vehicle owner generate his own power to use in his vehicle with hydrogen?
  9. that is called natural selection - strengthening the gene pool. if a bird flying in the sky can't keep away from a turbine blade, then they don't deserve to share the sky with the other smart birds
  10. I can't recall if I told this story here before, but last year I was seeing Dead and Company (Current iteration of the Grateful Dead, less Jerry of course), and everyone was smoking cannabis. An older gentleman the row in front of me sparked up a robustos sized cigar. Someone with a joint in their hand asked (politely, but still) if the guy could put out his cigar.... The guy politely replied....no. And enjoyed a 1 hour cigar over at least 1.5 hours...just nursing it along.
  11. great post. But a pet peeve of mine is calling wind turbines windmills. Windmills mill grain. Wind Turbines generate power
  12. storage of electricity is becoming more efficient. There is lots of dollars being invested in alternate forms of energy storage that do not include lithium. one of the biggest factors in EV success will be the owners ability to generate, store, then utilize the electricity required to operate their vehicle. buying your electricity from the grid is one thing, and subject to local distribution grid costs, but the ability to harvest your own energy, and utilize it for only the cost of equipment will be game changer. and that time is not far off.
  13. summertime is for enjoying my 2+ hour sessions. so there is only one cigar that comes to mind, reigning supreme above all others. Esplendidos.
  14. Hammer Smokin'

    El Blunto

    Having been a pot smoker for the past 25 years, and having countless number of friends also partake, I don't know of a single person (no one) who would consider mixing tobacco with cannabis. I don't know where this large percentage of the market who mixes tobacco and cannabis resides. In fact, cannabis smokers (unfortunately) think tobacco is the devils plant, and would never consider mixing, or smoking it.
  15. " Selling Havanas on eBay is very lucrative " you don't say
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.