If past presidents had taken the energy issue seriously...

[herm0016]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: herm0016

Originally posted by: ericlp
We could be building Solar Farms right now in our deserts along the Mexico boarders and provide 1/3 if not half of our energy needs from solar alone.

there is no way this would work. solar and wind are useless to us in the long term for any large percent of our energy needs until we find an efficient way to store energy so we can use it when it is cloudy/not windy and at night. It would have to be about 100,000 sq miles of cells.
nobody will listen to the real issues!!

You don't need to 'store' that power. You need to move it where it's needed 🙂

apparently you think demand is constant??? i guess we don't need power at night either... ?? gotta charge all those electric cars with something.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: herm0016

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: herm0016

Originally posted by: ericlp
We could be building Solar Farms right now in our deserts along the Mexico boarders and provide 1/3 if not half of our energy needs from solar alone.

there is no way this would work. solar and wind are useless to us in the long term for any large percent of our energy needs until we find an efficient way to store energy so we can use it when it is cloudy/not windy and at night. It would have to be about 100,000 sq miles of cells.
nobody will listen to the real issues!!

You don't need to 'store' that power. You need to move it where it's needed 🙂

apparently you think demand is constant??? i guess we don't need power at night either... ?? gotta charge all those electric cars with something.

If you would like to participate in an adult conversation, that's great. Clearly you have nothing to add to the conversation, however.

 

[Moonbeam]

A mature discussion of our solar potential

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: BrownTown
He may have been right there, but he also killed the nuclear program for TVA here in Tennessee which means now 60% of our energy is coal when it should have been 60% nuclear. Not to mention the 30 billion in debt half of which is directly the result of nuclear reactors that were good to go and then canceled by Carters administration.

There were numerous power plants across the nation that were canceled in the 1970's and early 1980's.

We didn't need the electricity 🙂

And it's reasonable to question whether we will need all the new power plants that are currently proposed.

We certainly need to replace aging infrastructure with more efficient plants. I think you kinda miss the point on the question of the debt associated with the canceled projects.

The debt load on consumers would have been substantially higher if all the plants had been built (for electricity we didn't need).

Any discussion concerning new power plants must be coupled with a comprehensive plan which evaluates peak loading, transmission grids. load management, conservation and efficiency, and alternative production.

You know. A real National Energy Policy.

Uh, yes we needed those plants as domestic electricity demand has done nothing but grow. Nuclear plants ordered in the late 70s to early 80s would have probably come online in the late 80s and early 90s. That's right about the time the energy sector turned to then cheap abundant natural gas for their growing generation needs. Now that gas has been rocketing up we're in a bind. There is a good reason every utility with nuclear generators has sought to have their plants "uprated" over the last 20 years in order to produce more power.

TMI was a public relations disaster even though the event itself caused no harm. All plants on order after that ended up being canceled in the regulatory and public fear shit storm that followed (at enormous expense).

Conservation should be implemented where possible and practical. The fact remains that our demand for electricity is still going to grow and we have to meet that need with the cost effective (key words) means at our disposal.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: K1052
Carter also killed off spent fuel reprocessing...I consider that to be a president taking energy seriously (albeit in the wrong direction).

Bush I suspended spent fuel reprocessing.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: K1052
Carter also killed off spent fuel reprocessing...I consider that to be a president taking energy seriously (albeit in the wrong direction).

Bush I suspended spent fuel reprocessing.

As I posted above, Ford suspended spent fuel reprocessing.

 

[naddicott]

From the wiki entry on the DoE:

The Carter era. President Carter's National Energy Plan had two broad objectives: first, to reduce dependence on foreign oil; and, second, to develop renewable and inexhaustible sources of energy. The DOE proposed energy efficiency standards for new buildings, created the Solar Training Institute, and worked with General Motors to develop prototype electric cars and trucks.
...
The Reagan and Bush era. Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan sought to abolish the DOE. He cut hundreds of positions from enforcement divisions of the agency. Reagan's abolition attempt failed in Congress when a General Accounting Office study revealed that abolition of the DOE would not save any money. Reagan was still able to change the function significantly. The Reagan-era DOE placed a much stronger focus on nuclear weapons production, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels. The Reagan administration cut DOE funding for renewable energy and conservation programs by as much as 80 percent, while it pledged to speed the licensing process of new nuclear power plants. The Reagan-era DOE deregulated the gasoline market. Between 1981 and 1989 the DOE dramatically expanded its weapons production and testing activities. During the previous decade nuclear weapons had been tested once every two years. In the 1980s three nuclear tests were conducted each year. The DOE also began preparations to store high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

What the DOE might have accomplished with it's original funding levels is really just a question of speculation at this point.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: naddicott
From the wiki entry on the DoE:

The Carter era. President Carter's National Energy Plan had two broad objectives: first, to reduce dependence on foreign oil; and, second, to develop renewable and inexhaustible sources of energy. The DOE proposed energy efficiency standards for new buildings, created the Solar Training Institute, and worked with General Motors to develop prototype electric cars and trucks.
...
The Reagan and Bush era. Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan sought to abolish the DOE. He cut hundreds of positions from enforcement divisions of the agency. Reagan's abolition attempt failed in Congress when a General Accounting Office study revealed that abolition of the DOE would not save any money. Reagan was still able to change the function significantly. The Reagan-era DOE placed a much stronger focus on nuclear weapons production, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels. The Reagan administration cut DOE funding for renewable energy and conservation programs by as much as 80 percent, while it pledged to speed the licensing process of new nuclear power plants. The Reagan-era DOE deregulated the gasoline market. Between 1981 and 1989 the DOE dramatically expanded its weapons production and testing activities. During the previous decade nuclear weapons had been tested once every two years. In the 1980s three nuclear tests were conducted each year. The DOE also began preparations to store high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

What the DOE might have accomplished with it's original funding levels is really just a question of speculation at this point.

What an excellent summary of the contrast. And I think it makes clear how 'popular opinion' can be at odds with the actual merits of the policies of these leaders.

In other words, Carter was right on target with his policies bolded above, and Reagan was misguided with his.

 

[dawp]

Don't forget about Three Mile Island in '79 that soured most of the public to nuclear power. If it wasn't for that little accident we would most likely have a few more nuclear power plants.

 

[BrownTown]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: BrownTown
He may have been right there, but he also killed the nuclear program for TVA here in Tennessee which means now 60% of our energy is coal when it should have been 60% nuclear. Not to mention the 30 billion in debt half of which is directly the result of nuclear reactors that were good to go and then canceled by Carters administration.

There were numerous power plants across the nation that were canceled in the 1970's and early 1980's.

We didn't need the electricity 🙂

And it's reasonable to question whether we will need all the new power plants that are currently proposed.

We certainly need to replace aging infrastructure with more efficient plants. I think you kinda miss the point on the question of the debt associated with the canceled projects.

The debt load on consumers would have been substantially higher if all the plants had been built (for electricity we didn't need).

Any discussion concerning new power plants must be coupled with a comprehensive plan which evaluates peak loading, transmission grids. load management, conservation and efficiency, and alternative production.

You know. A real National Energy Policy.

Well the thing is that they (TVA) canceled 12 plants at that time and some of them were a good idea, but they had plant that had the fuel on site ready to go (Watts Bar and Bellefonte) and they pulled the plug, thats is simply not an economic decision, but a political one.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: naddicott
From the wiki entry on the DoE:

The Carter era. President Carter's National Energy Plan had two broad objectives: first, to reduce dependence on foreign oil; and, second, to develop renewable and inexhaustible sources of energy. The DOE proposed energy efficiency standards for new buildings, created the Solar Training Institute, and worked with General Motors to develop prototype electric cars and trucks.
...

The Reagan and Bush era. Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan sought to abolish the DOE. He cut hundreds of positions from enforcement divisions of the agency.

Reagan's abolition attempt failed in Congress when a General Accounting Office study revealed that abolition of the DOE would not save any money.

Reagan was still able to change the function significantly.

The Reagan-era DOE placed a much stronger focus on nuclear weapons production, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels.

The Reagan administration cut DOE funding for renewable energy and conservation programs by as much as 80 percent, while it pledged to speed the licensing process of new nuclear power plants.

The Reagan-era DOE deregulated the gasoline market.

Clearly our current state is Republicans fault

Sadly all this evidence of that may still not be enough for a sea change in the White House come this November 🙁