• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Random thoughts ..Why we need fusion, alternative energy

That is a sweet photo 🙂

I bet that it would save a lot of money, thats for sure. That's strictly speculation on my part, though.
 
Originally posted by: slatr
I wonder what one 24 hour US blackout would total in $ saved. (not that it would happen)

http://veimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/1438/earth_lights_lrg.jpg
Click to expand...

The $ saved from not using elecrticity for 24 hours would be far less than the $ lost by not having an economy for 24 hours. Nevermind the $ lost to inevitable looting and rioting.

Also, I don't see why this has to do with fusion or alternative energy...it's just a pic of lights on at night.
Although it is very cool, IMHO.
 
I thought about looting, but was just wondering if things like that were controlled, what kind of money it would save.

We do need an alternative energy source.. think about what we are wasting.

EDIT: Just some random thoughts.. this is not a dead serious conversation.
 
Wasn't there some great (sci-fi/fantasy) plan years ago to use some sort of mirror to illuminate portions of the earth at night?
 
Originally posted by: slatr
I thought about looting, but was just wondering if things like that were controlled, what kind of money it would save.

We do need an alternative energy source.. think about what we are wasting. I
Click to expand...

We'd still lose money from lost productivity. People not able to work in offices after dark. No computers to speed up tasks. Factories would just stop running, workshops would not be able to use electric tools. Looting aside, our economy would more or less just stop for 24 hours.

this tells me that the US GDP is approxximately $11,750,000,000,000 so that divided by 365 is ~$32,191,780,822 -- 32 billion dollars. Assume that we only lose 1/2 of productivity.... or ~16 billion (we'd probably lose upwards of 75%)

According to http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html, we seem to average about 350 terawatt hours per month, so divide that by 30 and we get 11.67 terawatt hours per day....according to the same site, the average retail price of electricty in febuary 2006 was 8.42 cents per kilowatt hour. Thus: according to this the cost of running the lights for 24 hours is less than one billion dollars.

Thus, turning off the lights for 24 hours would cost us well over fifteen billion dollars.
 
I love that picture.

and err So explained why and the $ of it. heh damn.

it would be a very bad idea to NOT have electricity for 24 hours. not to mention all the people in medical wards that need it.
 
Originally posted by: waggy
I love that picture.

and err So explained why and the $ of it. heh damn.

it would be a very bad idea to NOT have electricity for 24 hours. not to mention all the people in medical wards that need it.
Click to expand...


Heh, yeah. Sorry to rain on your thread slatr, I just got really excited about demonstrating my point. 😛
 
I don't think the OP is suggesting that we have a 24 hour total blackout, just thinking about all of the energy and money we could save if we just didn't use all of the UNNECESSARY energy we use for a single day. And the answer is that it'd be relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things, because it's only one day.
 
Originally posted by: So
Also, I don't see why this has to do with fusion or alternative energy...it's just a pic of lights on at night.
Click to expand...
It has to do with new energy sources because there's still an enormous amount of space left undeveloped. When those places come along, the new drain on power infrastructres will be absurd.

 
Heh, yeah. Sorry to rain on your thread slatr, I just got really excited about demonstrating my point.
*******
..and I agree with you. Excellent work So.

It is the whole magnitude/cost of what we are using. I am not even considering tertiary issues such as environment, but what could we do to maintain this level of consumption?

 
Originally posted by: slatr
Heh, yeah. Sorry to rain on your thread slatr, I just got really excited about demonstrating my point.
*******
..and I agree with you. Excellent work So.

It is the whole magnitude/cost of what we are using. I am not even considering tertiary issues such as environment, but what could we do to maintain this level of consumption?
Click to expand...

you think us pesky insignificant humans have any major effect on the earth? the earth survived comets, ice world, dinosaurs...just live life. don't think about the environment; you'll just get stress and lose hair.
 
No.. I am wondering if you care if your great-great-great grandkids will mind seeing a large war and then riding to work on a horse.

I guess the earth would be taking care of that way, if you are interested environmentally.

RESET.. MANKIND.. WAR.. NO FUEL.. WE BEGIN AGAIN

 
I don't want to speculate and have not looked at the Almanac in a long time and haven't paid close attention to official stats, but by the looks of that picture, India and China both consume more electricity than all of Africa. Both of these countries are expanding rapidly so more consumption will take place. As for fusion energy, that fusion power plant that they had in Sim City was very sweet and had massive power, but it was really expensive. Maybe that was a realistic picture of the situation 😀
 
Originally posted by: slatr
Heh, yeah. Sorry to rain on your thread slatr, I just got really excited about demonstrating my point.
*******
..and I agree with you. Excellent work So.

It is the whole magnitude/cost of what we are using. I am not even considering tertiary issues such as environment, but what could we do to maintain this level of consumption?
Click to expand...

How can we maintain it? With a mix of Nuke plants, coal generation (anc carbon sequestriation to mitigate environmental effects), and wind power.

We need nukes, because despite the public perception, there will be radioactive waste from fuson, abd we need to know how to handle it. It's well within our capability to do so, but we to do it and nukes will tide us over for the 50+ years it will take to get fusion figured out and available on mass scale.
 
Originally posted by: slatr
No.. I am wondering if you care if your great-great-great grandkids will mind seeing a large war and then riding to work on a horse.

I guess the earth would be taking care of that way, if you are interested environmentally.

RESET.. MANKIND.. WAR.. NO FUEL.. WE BEGIN AGAIN
Click to expand...

Don't worry, once we reach desperate levels, we'll put all the hippies in jail and make San Francisco full of nuke plant farms.

You assume there's going to be a war? I'm guessing to fight over resources? Do you not understand the earth cycle?
 
What about not supplying energy and night so that night clubs, it servers, laundry machines, et al, can't operate? 😛
 
You assume there's going to be a war? I'm guessing to fight over resources? Do you not understand the earth cycle?
***
Explain please..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top