Geothermal energy
Gillian R. Foulger, Ph.D. Full professor of Geophysics, University of Durham: Is There a Free Lunch Out There? Geothermal Energy, its Potential and Challenges as a Renewable, Alternative Energy Resource. As doom and gloom predictions from scientists about global warming rise to a crescendo, there is increasing public demand to know what can be done. Basically, there are two options consume less, and/or find renewable alternative energy sources to burning hydrocarbons. Geothermal energy is one possible alternative. How much of our energy consumption does it currently satisfy? What is its realistic potential, and what are the technical challenges to maximizing that potential? How green is it really, and is it truly renewable? Does it offer a free lunch, or are there environmental costs in utilizing it? Are your tax dollars at work on these problems? Gillian R. Foulger, U.K., and director of her own geothermal consultancy company, presents some of the hottest geothermal issues, including an overview of how this resource is utilized around the world, what direction technology is moving, and what is going on in the US. She has worked with the U.S. Geological Survey for over 20 years on earthquake seismology, GPS surveying and geothermal energy. Her first work in the field was in Iceland, where she made some remarkable discoveries of geothermal resources. Since then she has been a leading expert in the field. Worldwide, one of the biggest users of geothermal resources is Iceland where 40% of their energy is from this source. Worldwide, there are about 9,000 Megawatts of electricity generated geothermally, with about 2,500 Megawatts of that being generated in the USA. 2,200 Megawatts are generated in California, mostly from The Geysers, a geothermal area near Santa Rosa that is as unique as Hawaii is unique as a volcanic area. The resource is expected to last for several decades more, at which time much of the fluid will have been mined out of the rocks. Looking to the future, there are various possible ways to get geothermal power out of the ground. One is to drill a deep well to mine heat directly off the magma beneath volcanoes. Dr. Foulger "wouldn't bet her pension on that one", but considers it an interesting idea in the Chinese sense. Another is to put a coil under the ground in the yard, far enough below the surface that the temperature is fairly constant. With a heat exchanger it is energy efficient to get heat during the winter and sink heat in the summer. She said this kind of thing is becoming ever more common in Europe. Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Who Killed the Electric Car?
On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:44 PM, jon louis mann wrote: > i think the big three got a huge scare with the success of toyotas's > hybrids. i din't buy the i-phone and am waiting for the competitiion > to come out with better and cheaper models. i will probably jump on > the hybrid, or e-car bandwagon, when better models come out. I am about at that point now. Soonish -- in the next year at most -- one or both of our cars will need to be replaced. It'll be with an electric or hybrid, most likely the latter. As for the iPhone, three guys where I work got 'em. It's just not that exciting. It has a fine browser, but it doesn't have cut-and- paste, so you can look, but you can't _do_ anything with the info you get through it. It has a cool map application that crashes after about 30 seconds. It's not even all that useful as a phone: it's hard to dial and one guy had to go out and spend another $100 on a Jawbone bluetooth headset because it is not even loud enough to use as a phone. I am a huge Mac bigot and I still cannot see myself buying one -- or a cheap imitation -- anytime soon. Correction: anytime. Dave "Crackberry addict" Land Fashion Victims Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Weekly Chat Reminder
As Steve said, "The Brin-L weekly chat has been a list tradition for over six years. Way back on 27 May, 1998, Marco Maisenhelder first set up a chatroom for the list, and on the next day, he established a weekly chat time. We've been through several servers, chat technologies, and even casts of regulars over the years, but the chat goes on... and we want more recruits! Whether you're an active poster or a lurker, whether you've been a member of the list from the beginning or just joined today, we would really like for you to join us. We have less politics, more Uplift talk, and more light-hearted discussion. We're non-fattening and 100% environmentally friendly... -(_() Though sometimes marshmallows do get thrown. The Weekly Brin-L chat is scheduled for Wednesday 3 PM Eastern/2 PM Central time in the US, or 7 PM Greenwich time. There's usually somebody there to talk to for at least eight hours after the start time. If you want to attend, it's really easy now. All you have to do is send your web browser to: http://wtgab.demon.co.uk/~brinl/mud/ ..And you can connect directly from William's new web interface! My instruction page tells you how to log on, and how to talk when you get in: http://www.brin-l.org/brinmud.html It also gives a list of commands to use when you're in there. In addition, it tells you how to connect through a MUD client, which is more complicated to set up initially, but easier and more reliable than the web interface once you do get it set up." -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ "This message was sent automatically using launchd. But even if WTG is away on holiday, at least it shows the server is still up." ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Who Killed the Electric Car?
We and the Europeans have poured billions into alternative energy sources with modest results. Only wind has shown any market potential... i don't know if only wind has shown market potential. i have made money on the stock market with solar. i've also been successful investing in the euro: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070710/dollar/ Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Who Killed the Electric Car?
At 10:48 PM Tuesday 7/10/2007, Dan Minette wrote: >Government putting money in a field doesn't guarantee success. [...] > >We and the Europeans have poured billions into alternative energy sources >will modest results. Only wind has shown any market potential Well, that's no surprise: it's the one thing (even more than our tax money) that government by its very nature provides a limitless supply of . . . Hot Air Buffoons Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Who Killed the Electric Car?
some other questions, and observations, dan... would you agree that moore's films (which many people refuse to see because their minds are made up) have stimulated a debate, not only on health care reform, but on gun control, the automobile and defense industries? would you agree that this is a good thing? how do you feel about pharmaceuticals and defense being americas's largest industries? do you believe that the "vast right wing conspiracy" (whether or not it exists as a coordinating alliance~) supports pure science? these are people who believe in creationist science and are adamantly opposed to stem cell research. i agree that government can make a mess of health care, social security, education, and the justice system, but do you believe the profit oriented establishment can provide a better alternative? jon 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Who Killed the Electric Car?
When did I say I thought Rush or Fox were good sources? you didn't, i was using the talk radio and fox example for comparison. that polemic is a lot more suspicious than moore's theater. i consider all the parties in the mideast to be out of control, but if i had to choose the lesser evil, i would pick israel. in a choice between bush and moore i would choose moore. when moore went off on blitzer and gupta, he was right about how america has treated the rescue workers, and he has been proven to be right about many of the claims made in fahrenheit 911. he was also honest in sicko when ranking the us as slightly higher than cuba, in overall medical care, (IF you have health coverage) with slovenia in the middle. moore was right to blast cnn for not telling the truth to the american people (especially about the pharmaceutical companies, who are also major cnn sponsors). as for moore's numbers on money spent by Cuba and the US, i would certainly give more credibility to a unattributed bbc report, than any projection by bush. i would also consider the fact that cuba is far more limited in resources (and under embargo) but is still able to provide free medical care for its citizens. i pay a lot for my medial plan, plus co-payments and deductibles. i would rather pay higher taxes for national care that would benefit me rather than insurance and providers. that is what moore is saying and most americans will agree. of course there is a longer wait in canada for emergency heart catheterization than there is in america, IF you have health coverage... i don't see gupta talking about people dying in hospital waiting rooms, or being sent away because they didn't have authorization. he did come out after, and admit that there is room for improvement across the board. no apology, yet, from cnn for being wrong about fahrenheit 911. all in all i still say moore provides a more balanced analysis than fox and other emotionally biased news sources, and he is not boring. i haven't "sicko" yet, but i have heard it makes this failure of american health care glaringly apparent. i suffered from gall stones for ten years because i was treated with drugs that only relieved the symtoms. i believe in gun control, too, and have mentioned more than once that i did not like what moore did when he ambushed charlton heston, in columbine. i also had a visceral reaction to his media collage with louis armstrong singing "what a wonderful world". it was a powerful emotional message. it is true that government putting money in research doesn't guarantee success. it is also true that wars have created advances in medical technology. small design teams can make breakthroughs where larger facilities fail. i would like to see practical and cost effective research, but both parties in congress are not exercising their oversight. i don't know what would be required for that to happen, other than to elect a new congress. we agree that islamic terrorists share the same goal of fighting for a resurgence of muslim supremacy, but are they really the threat to america that bush makes them out to be, and could there be ways to support moderate arab forces, other than regime overthrow? i don't know if it is a reasonable conclusion is that battery cars are not a cost effective means of transportation. I saw the film and they did mention improvement were made to the original prototype. i got the impression that more research was needed and the conclusion was the car makers stopped because they were able to lobby successfully against the legislation that required them to provide alternatives. tha is why they destroyed the prototypes. yes, the best response to pat answers from the left and the right is to hold them up to rigorous, skeptical analysis. i believe the films moore has made do a public service in exposing many of the failures of the automobile industry, health care and the tragic consequences of easy access to automatic weapons. he isn't perfect by a long shot, but much preferable to rabble rousers like rush limbaugh, bill o'reilley or dennis miller. i don't know if there are fundamental problems in developing alternative energy sources so we shouldn't try. i am not a scientist, but i wonder what the result would be if we invested one tenth of what we spend on making war? i absolutely agree we should be investing in basic sciences that can lead to future advances in energy technology, including fusion and plasma physics. i would not rule out engineering applications until we know enough science. solar power is already showing progress due to increased competition. we have not made as much in the way of advances in biofuel as we could if there was a manhattan type project. of course there are risks with every new technology and risk/benefit analysis need to be done. we should have properly assessed the problems involved with nuclear waste. we know how to process spent fuel rods for example, but then we are
