OT - It has become apparent ...

[Frank Boettcher]

Those are without a doubt the scariest words I've read here in quite some time.

Frank

[dpb]

Lew Hodgett wrote: ...

...

That's the wrong way -- if it turns out to be an uneconomical choice for whatever reason, money should be lost and the particular technology should go away posthaste in place of whatever else happens to be the winner. That should be determined by the markets not the government.

What the government needs to do is to set a fixed set of rules and leave them unchanged for a significant length of time rather than twiddling them around all the time by changes in tax credits or additional taxes or different emissions controls standards, etc., etc., ...

--

[dpb]

Yeah, the last part is correct but undoubtedly it will require more _dis_-involvement to provide anything close to stability. Unfortunately, the best thing the gov't provides is the uncertainty of what will they do next?

--

[dpb]

I was talking the incubation centers more than paid research from either...there are at least 30 new startups in the Oak Ridge, TN, area that are a byproduct of guys w/ ideas w/ the UT/ORNL incubation process that are going concerns.

--

[Jack Stein]

When it gets too large, alternatives should pop up like wild maple trees. I say "should" because government involvement can always throw a monkey wrench in the gears of the free market.

If he has his own ax to grind, why would his figures mean anything? I saw him on TV pimping natural gas, so I figure he is selling natural gas? Not that there is anything wrong with him selling gas or using natural gas, but for some reason, I think he has more invested than save the world, save the country type stuff. Am I wrong?

That is a nasty tax, but our own country taxes the hell out of that $700M also. Watch what happens when all that tax money goes away and everyone is driving "cheap" electric cars. Do you think your wonderful government will simply eat that huge (windfall profit) tax loss?

There is already a ton of alternative energy, and much more on the way, particularly if big brothers stays out of the way.

True, but then the cost of gasoline doesn't need to be artificially inflated. Normal supply and demand will take care of it all, just as it has for most products not controlled by government and monopolies. Microsoft comes to mind first and fore most when thinking of getting screwed by a monopoly...

Depends on your definition of "cheap". If the government taxes the shit out of each gallon of gas you buy, and pays you to run inefficient solar or wind power, things can get out of whack in a hurry. On the other hand, if Morris comes up with an efficient solar panel, or wind turbine or anything that is better than oil, it will be available simply do to supply and demand that always works well over the long run, with minimum government involvement.

That time seldom needs defined by Big Brother.

The only time you need government to get involved in this crap is if someone monopolizes things (like Microsoft has the OS market) Otherwise, there are plenty of capitalists willing to take the risk of getting rich on alternate energy systems that make sense.

Private capital is always right around the corner, looking for ways to get rich making you happy.

[dpb]

Jack Stein wrote: ...

...

No, you're not wrong... :) (or, :(, I'm not sure, actually which...)

The side effect of wind generation is that one will need far more reserve generation owing to the unsteady nature of the fuel source (the wind).

Now, guess what's the most likely/convenient/lowest-initial-cost generation capacity w/ the facility to have the required very rapid ramp rates????

--

[Jack Stein]

Amen to that. Unless of course he meant governments responsibility to keep terrorists and others from traipsing across our borders to blow stuff up, or insuring that all business is on a level playing field, taxed equally and not monopolizing markets or simply invading our country to change it's capitalistic nature, or not printing money whenever it feels like it needs to spend another trillion on stupid, unneeded projects...

Somehow I think he is closer to thinking government should seize control of business and decide for us what is best as private business and the individual are too stupid to figure out whats works best.

I'm probably reading too much into it, what the heck...

[Morris Dovey]

[1] Produce an inexpensive, maintenance-free, extended-service, multi-horsepower engine that performs direct conversion of solar radiation to mechanical energy. [2] Use that technology to implement an inexpensive, maintenance-free, extended-service pump capable of moving air and/or fluids using only direct conversion of solar radiation to mechanical energy. [3] Use both of the above to implement an inexpensive, maintenance-free, extended-service cooling/refrigeration system using only direct conversion of solar radiation to mechanical energy.

The original goal was to identify practical ways to improve availability and quality of food and shelter worldwide using already known technology which did not depend on the existence of any energy infrastructure.

That goal diverged into two fairly broad 'sub-problems':

[1] Keeping dwelling temperatures within some reasonable temperature bounds, and [2] dealing with the problem that the food-supply depends highly on water - and that the water is all too frequently in the 'wrong' place.

The only universal energy source I could identify was solar. The first goal made the obvious split into:

[1a] Solar heating, and [1b] Solar cooling.

The first of these has been solved with a passive solar panel that is so efficient it could be labeled "stealthy" - it eats radiant energy at all wavelengths from UV to HF radio (I don't have a way to test LF and VLF) with a remarkable efficiency - and it'll do that without moving parts, without electricity, and without fuel anywhere between the Arctic Circle and the Tropic of Cancer, and between the Tropic of Capricorn and the Antarctic Circle.

Interestingly [1b] and [2] appear to be so closely related that their solutions can use not only the same technology, but much of the same hardware. Anyone who's interested in getting a glimpse of how this stuff is shaping up is invited to browse through the pages linked below.

HTH

[Lew Hodgett]

The alternate energy problem is IMHO, so complex that it is beyond the ability of the free market economy to solve it in the foreseeable future.

It is so large that it is going to require the everybody in the entire country to get involved and devote a part of their energies to solving this problem.

Seems to me the definition of gov't is to provide the means to accomplish those things that we as individuals can't achieve.

I'm certainly not qualified to comment on the nitty gritty of how you structure gov't to achieve a solution; however, the necessity of gov't leadership in a project of this magnitude is obvious.

Lew

[dpb]

I think that's not so...the transition _to_ oil was done w/o government intervention and the transition away will occur in that manner too _IF_ the government doesn't screw it up, that is.

Not to me it isn't--in fact what is obvious to me is that whoever tries to mandate a particular solution or set of solutions will undoubtedly not be prescient enough to foresee all the problems in their chosen paths nor nearly capable enough to predict all the other technologies that will spring up if not prevented from doing so by artificially propping up less successful favorite sons (so to speak).

Again, businesses on both ends will look to make the most prudent choices for their own success--both ends means consumers of energy and producers. If there's an opportunity to make a new widget, somebody (Morris is a prime example on a small scale, there are thousands of others like him and virtually every company involved in the most remote way is also) will give it a shot. Not all will succeed, of course, but the chances of finding the most effective solution(s) are far better if there's incentive other than artificial ones.

That said, there's a role government can play and that is to judiciously fund research and deployment of proven technologies and they do. The problems arise when the policy mandate for specific technologies overrides the competitive market forces so people react to those influences instead.

I think the German emphasis on solar and wind now is just one example--their conversion is sizable but the extremely high subsidization rates are the cause. If not careful they're going to end up w/ an infrastructure based on non-economic technology that will hurt the overall economic competitiveness for a long time to come.

Similar issues arise here w/ the mantra of wind power--examination of output from the large wind farms installed so far show they have at best

40% average capacity factors and periods of only 20% even when built in the most advantageous areas of the country. That means it takes from 2.5X to 4X the target generation capacity as installed capacity which is a very expensive capital investment solely for the privilege of using a free fuel. And, as has been noted elsewhere, that the wind isn't as reliable a fuel source as any conventional, there's the added need for spinning reserve at a far higher percentage of grid capacity than for other forms of generation. And, unfortunately, the only really suitable form right now and for the foreseeable future to provide that reserve capacity is the gas turbine which is about the most illogical use we can make of dwindling natural gas supplies.

In short, the market will do a far better job of determining what and when alternative sources are available if allowed to do so. Of course, besides the government often being a hindrance more than a help, there's the problem of the anti-development crowd, no matter what the alternative. In the end, if fear it may be that which is the most limiting factor in responding in a timely manner, even over government.

The problem as I see it is to too great an extent we have shifted from a decentralized "bottom-up" society to one that expects that every problem must be solved by a central government. That despite ample demonstration that rarely if ever does a real solution to a problem come from that end.

W/ that, finis...

--

[krw]

...and you believe government can solve the problem?

...and you believe in fairies, too?

No, the purpose of government is to do exactly what the Constitution says it should do. It is *not* to tell me how to live my life. I would hope that you believe in liberty, as well.

No, it is not obvious. People are flawed, by nature. Government is simply an extension of people, just as flawed and a *lot* more powerful. That is a very dangerous combination.

[krw]

From reading Lew's previous comments, I think you're pretty much right on the money.

[todd]

The problem is that there are no leaders in government. As I heard it put recently, do you think the "alphas" of our society go into politics? (By the way, if you nominate Obama for the job I'm going to puke on my shoes). You want to know what you get when you put the government in charge of alternate energy? Ethanol from corn. I'm from a corn state, and it's the stupidest idea I've ever heard. Putting the goverment in charge these days gets you political solutions instead ones that make economic sense. What's the solution, then? It beats the hell out of me, but I bet it isn't going to be more government involvement.

todd

[Lew Hodgett]

That's why we have elections on a regular basis.

With all the crap a candidate and their family has to endure, there is little incentive to run for political office.

You seeem to have a problem controlling body functions.

Since less than 5% of the corn is converted, before being returned as animal feed suplement, maybe the ethanol program is not such a bad call after all.

BTW, think you will find the lobbying of ADM, ConAgra, Cargill, et al, may hve had something to do with implementation of the ethanol program.

It was exactly a lack of leadership from congress but rather the lobbyists that lead to the environment being established.

BTW, it is my understanding that corn was just a stop gap.

Those plants can be converted to other feed stocks on short notice.

IMHO, we need a major change in leadership to among other things, reestablish the reputation of gov't not to be an ATM for the privileged few, but a servant of the many.

Lew

[Lew Hodgett]

Sounds like you need what we used to call a "Rabbi", AKA: Someone who can give you air cover and tell you where the "bombs" are planted.

If you have put together a good game plan, somebody like P Allen (Microsoft founder) might be interested.

He has been supporting Rutan and his companies space research here in SoCal.

Just a thought.

Today, a private foundation might be the most productive.

Lew

[Morris Dovey]

Thank you for not puking on /my/ shoes. :-\

[Morris Dovey]

Perhaps. Thanks for your thoughts.

[todd]

Thanks for making my point.

> You want to know what you get when you put the government in charge of

Duh! You think? Like I said...politics.

And that's about as smart as using corn. Can they be coverted to cellulosic ethanol production? IF ethanol can be a viable fuel, it's not going to be made from grain. IMO, all of it is stop-gap until we can get all-electric vehicles.

How about we reestablish the idea of a limited federal government that actually follows the powers enumerated to it in the Constitution? I know...that's just crazy talk. todd

[dpb]

...

Which was also one of those in previous sources of funding I gave... :)

I'll reiterate EPRI (their actual name these days but the entity formerly known as the Electric Power Research Institute) is always looking for good ideas to fund. They're self-funded by (mostly) member electric utilities. Spent quite a number of years w/ them as primary client altho my specialty was I&C-related as pertained to advanced controls/instrumentation of interest to the utilities. Last project before retiring back to the family farm after Dad died was pulverized coal flow measurement via turbulent noise and unique signal processing. The intent is to go from concept to the device--at the time I left and passed the work to colleagues, DOE had just picked up a sizable fraction of the next step to fund a series of tests at the coal flow facility EPRI was building. All again to indicate there's $$ for ideas w/ merit and that have an end payoff.

--

[Morris Dovey]

I noticed that - and I appreciate your thinking as well. As happens sometimes when there's a sudden wealth of ideas, I find myself more than just a bit distracted by the possibilities...

You've worked on some interesting projects! (Recalling what you said in the cyclone separator thread, back when, and adding this...)

One aspect of the private foundation route would seem to be the need to identify those whose interests align with the hoped-for results - I can't help but wonder how enthusiastic an energy industry related foundation is likely to be for developments intended to shrink their markets...