How does alternative energy offset dependence on foreign oil?

[KingGheedora]

Probably a stupid question. But when I think of wind and solar power, I think of energy in "the grid". When I think of oil, I don't think of that energy going to "the grid", but pretty much only to transportation.

So basically, does oil get converted into energy that goes into the grid?

 

[Argo]

If I remember correctly most of the oil imported into US is used in power plants. Also, until we create more non-oil based energy sources electric cars will still depend on oil based energy.

 

[Kelvrick]

They're called gas power plants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant

 

[SparkyJJO]

in 2005 our power grid was just under 19% using natural gas and 3% from oil. The natural gas is coming from gas wells here in the USA, natural gas doesn't get transported too easily.

http://www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/im...pie_chart_fuel_mix.gif

I think we need more nuke and hydroelectric. Coal is ok but with all these excess regulations on them coming into play and Obama wanting to bankrupt it (brilliant, since about 50% of our power is from coal, idiot) we'll need something else.

 

[KingGheedora]

OK, was just wondering why Obama keeps explaining that part of the stimulus package will reduce dependence on foreign oil by developing wind turbines and solar power. If 3% of our grid energy comes from oil, doesn't seem like that significant a thing.

Unless he's betting that electric cars will take off, and then use energy from the grid instead of oil. Is that what it is?

 

[IGBT]

..it's false economy. it doesn't.

 

[Veramocor]

Without electric or plug-in hybrids switching to 'renewable energy' such as wind and solar would not decrease our oil dependency with the excpetion of two possibilities.

Save natural gas by having more wind/solar/geothermal and then use the nat gas for vehicles (this is Pickens plan).

Electrifiy the freight railroad system, $$$$, expand freight rail even more $$$.

http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2006-05a.htm

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
in 2005 our power grid was just under 19% using natural gas and 3% from oil. The natural gas is coming from gas wells here in the USA, natural gas doesn't get transported too easily.

http://www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/im...pie_chart_fuel_mix.gif

I think we need more nuke and hydroelectric. Coal is ok but with all these excess regulations on them coming into play and Obama wanting to bankrupt it (brilliant, since about 50% of our power is from coal, idiot) we'll need something else.

New nuclear plants are in our future. I know I'll be paying for one that's being planned for Central Florida.

http://blogs.creativeloafing.c...clear-power-plant-you/

How about $200 billion or so of that new stimulus package goes towards financing nuclear plants, and have the government get a cut of the power production income over the years? We help to ween ourselves off of oil and eventually get paid back+ for the investment as well.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: Veramocor
Without electric or plug-in hybrids switching to 'renewable energy' such as wind and solar would not decrease our oil dependency with the excpetion of two possibilities.

Save natural gas by having more wind/solar/geothermal and then use the nat gas for vehicles (this is Pickens plan).

Electrifiy the freight railroad system, $$$$, expand freight rail even more $$$.

http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2006-05a.htm

Building more efficient cars will lower our dependence on foreign oil.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

How about both? No reason not to utilize all of these monstrous rivers/lakes we have in the US.

 

[Argo]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

How about both? No reason not to utilize all of these monstrous rivers/lakes we have in the US.

I believe all of the hydra power is used for our electric grid currently. Utility companies pretty much pulled every little drop of hydra power from US - it is one of the cheapest power sources after all. That's why states like Washington with abundance of hydra power have some of the cheapest electricity rates in the country.

As far as the original question - it's interesting, I didn't realize only 3% comes from oil. I was under impression it was way higher than that. Given that, I wonder if there's any other benefit of alternative fuels besides environmental reasons.

Another thing I always wondered, how does efficiency of oil power plants compare to that of internal combustion engines? If they are (like I suspect) more efficient then it would make sense to switch to electic cars regardless of source.

 

[badkarma1399]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

How about both? No reason not to utilize all of these monstrous rivers/lakes we have in the US.

Because liberal hippies will bitch if we build nuclear because its 'unsafe' and they'll bitch about hydroelectric because its destroying an ecosystem, or something.

I swear, the only way to satisfy some of these people is to live in the forest as a hermit. Even then they'll still probably find something to complain about.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Argo
....
Another thing I always wondered, how does efficiency of oil power plants compare to that of internal combustion engines? If they are (like I suspect) more efficient then it would make sense to switch to electic cars regardless of source.

It would be interesting to see some numbers; unfortunately, there are also going to be transmission losses from the power plant to homeowners. From there, the charging system's AC->DC converter will have some losses, and some will be lost in the motors and batteries.

End-to-end, I too wonder how the efficiency would stack up.


Nuclear fission + reprocessing now = very little waste. Besides, the high-level waste becomes much less dangerous in a relatively short time period, compared to the low-level, long-lived stuff. The most dangerous radioactive waste is dangerous because it decays so rapidly, producing lots of decay products in the process. But that's just it, it decays rapidly, meaning it is not as dangerous.

For the future: More efficient solar panels, made cheaply, and scattered across the country on rooftops + nuclear fusion, fueled by an abundant supply of deuterium from the oceans.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: KingGheedora
OK, was just wondering why Obama keeps explaining that part of the stimulus package will reduce dependence on foreign oil by developing wind turbines and solar power. If 3% of our grid energy comes from oil, doesn't seem like that significant a thing.

Unless he's betting that electric cars will take off, and then use energy from the grid instead of oil. Is that what it is?

That's basically the idea. It's also why the stimulus bill includes money to upgrade the electric infrastructure, which is a smart move IMO. Within the next 5-10 years, I think plug-in electric vehicles will really start to take off.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: badkarma1399

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

How about both? No reason not to utilize all of these monstrous rivers/lakes we have in the US.

Because liberal hippies will bitch if we build nuclear because its 'unsafe' and they'll bitch about hydroelectric because its destroying an ecosystem, or something.

I swear, the only way to satisfy some of these people is to live in the forest as a hermit. Even then they'll still probably find something to complain about.

..that's what they want. the eco-KOOKS want to send us back to an era of robes and sandals. They are flat out against any human activity. No matter how efficient you get they will eventually find some hook to hang their lame excuses on. The only answer is to legislate the sierra club, john muir society and the wilderness society and their off shoots out of business. otherwise be prepaired to sit in the dark. The dark is where they want you.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: IGBT
..it's false economy. it doesn't.

not just that, its unsustainable.
http://www.newscientist.com/ar...-is-unsustainable.html

if the left had not stopped us from building nuke plants like countries like france we'd have most of our electricity from no carbon generation.

and yea natural gas isn't easy to trasport without pipes or compressed in special ships...which aren'ta ll that common. its why the europeans are russias bitches these days. suckin off the teat of putin for all their talk of going green.

the output of wind and solar is still ridiculously low. to replace most of our generation would take ridiculous amounts of money.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Fuck, we need to find a good, efficient way to isolate hydrogen.

..find it and I'll drive it.

Wait. Why don't we use hydroelectric plants/dams to isolate hydrogen? You get energy to do it from the motion of the water, and you have plenty of water to split.

Do what they do in france. build lots of nuke plants and use off peak power to generate hydrogen.

How about both? No reason not to utilize all of these monstrous rivers/lakes we have in the US.

I believe all of the hydra power is used for our electric grid currently. Utility companies pretty much pulled every little drop of hydra power from US - it is one of the cheapest power sources after all. That's why states like Washington with abundance of hydra power have some of the cheapest electricity rates in the country.

As far as the original question - it's interesting, I didn't realize only 3% comes from oil. I was under impression it was way higher than that. Given that, I wonder if there's any other benefit of alternative fuels besides environmental reasons.

Another thing I always wondered, how does efficiency of oil power plants compare to that of internal combustion engines? If they are (like I suspect) more efficient then it would make sense to switch to electic cars regardless of source.

Just an FYI, if we drop coal for "alternative" energy, expect your power bill to double, or more. The only "renewable" power source that is actually more than a big PR device right now is geothermal.

We need nukes in the worst way, but that's never gonna happen, thanks to anti-nuke paranoia.

 

[JMapleton]

Originally posted by: So
We need nukes in the worst way, but that's never gonna happen, thanks to anti-nuke paranoia.

I do not support nuclear power until we have a government that will actually adequately protects the power plants from intruders.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: JMapleton

Originally posted by: So
We need nukes in the worst way, but that's never gonna happen, thanks to anti-nuke paranoia.

I do not support nuclear power until we have a government that will actually adequately protects the power plants from intruders.

Name me one incident of a nuclear plant being breached and the fuel being stolen for use in a weapon, much less turned into weapons grade material. Stop listening to people who profit from your fear -- there is no credible danger of a nuclear plant leading to a terrorist nuclear bomb.

 

[MikeMike]

whoever asked about efficiency, ICE are about 33% efficient...

 

[Throckmorton]

Energy is fungible. If you increase wind power, that means natural gas is available for running fleet vehicles, buses, etc.... which replaces oil used for those purposes.

We'll also need more power capacity for electric cars and plug in hybrids. So we can either build more natural gas power plants, or more solar power plants. Which would you rather have?

Nuclear power isn't some panacea like a lot of you apparently think. Remember, Mr. Nuclear himself, John McCain, didn't want nuclear waste shipped across Arizona.

You know.. one risk of nuclear power is some future conservative administration relaxing regulations "because the government is evil and private companies can police themselves better", resulting in contamination, meltdown, or improper disposal of waste. Unless we as a nation shift significantly to the left, the less nuclear power there is, the safer our children will be.