12-19-2017, 12:11 PM
|
#41 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY USA
Posts: 2,935
Thanks: 326
Thanked 1,315 Times in 968 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Lithium and cobalt production will increase if demand is there, and grid storage will choose the most cost effective solution to the problem.
|
Perfect. Blind economics 101. Why bother with renewables. Cornucopian demand will provide an endless supply of crude oil because we "demand" it.
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
12-19-2017, 12:51 PM
|
#42 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,469
Thanks: 4,214
Thanked 4,391 Times in 3,365 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
Why bother with renewables. Cornucopian demand will provide an endless supply of crude oil because we "demand" it.
|
I bother with renewables because of economics. Free fuel is cheaper than costly fuel.
In economics, demand isn't defined as the collective hope of consumers, but instead the willingness of consumers to purchase at various prices. If something becomes more scarce, the price usually increases. The demand for a good or service decreases as price increases.
In other words, we don't need Castro to tell us how much lithium to mine, or where to look for it. Market forces will more efficiently determine these things.
|
|
|
12-19-2017, 01:00 PM
|
#43 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY USA
Posts: 2,935
Thanks: 326
Thanked 1,315 Times in 968 Posts
|
I felt that you were inferring that demand would create a never ending supply of cobalt. In classic 20th century economic theory style. Cornucopian mindset is obviously false. Resources are finite.
|
|
|
12-19-2017, 03:16 PM
|
#44 (permalink)
|
Not Doug
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,186
Thanks: 7,225
Thanked 2,217 Times in 1,708 Posts
|
Is there no demand for vacuum energy? I cannot source a supply for it!
|
|
|
12-19-2017, 03:22 PM
|
#45 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,703
Thanks: 7,777
Thanked 8,586 Times in 7,070 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
Why bother with renewables. Cornucopian demand will provide an endless supply of crude oil because we "demand" it.
|
I bother with renewables because...
|
I appreciate the talking point, but stripping the " " from the quote takes the sarcasm right out of his mouth.
Like, the world needs more sarcasm.
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
____________________
.
."We're deeply sorry." -- Pfizer
|
|
|
12-21-2017, 01:02 PM
|
#46 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 2,653
Thanks: 301
Thanked 1,178 Times in 807 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
I feel that the ultimate energy storage device is a reactor of plutonium. Better yet, perhaps, antimatter.
|
I agree on nuclear but not for transportation, even a tiny reactor that only produced 100 hp would weigh 10 tons or more. I stand by nothing is better than a tank of gasoline for transportation. I guess I should stipulate transportation on earth. Transportation without gravity or atmosphere would be well suited for nuclear.
|
|
|
12-21-2017, 01:40 PM
|
#47 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,703
Thanks: 7,777
Thanked 8,586 Times in 7,070 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
I feel that the ultimate energy storage device is a reactor of plutonium. Better yet, perhaps, antimatter.
|
Wow, that slipped right past me. Easier said than done.
Think of all the effort being poured into fusion reactors, on the assumption that all the energy boiling off the surface of the Sun comes from beneath the Chromosphere rather than through plasma interactions with the planets and galax[y/ies].
Then think of that effort being put into Thorium reactors.
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
____________________
.
."We're deeply sorry." -- Pfizer
|
|
|
12-21-2017, 06:43 PM
|
#49 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,469
Thanks: 4,214
Thanked 4,391 Times in 3,365 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
I agree on nuclear but not for transportation, even a tiny reactor that only produced 100 hp would weigh 10 tons or more. I stand by nothing is better than a tank of gasoline for transportation. I guess I should stipulate transportation on earth. Transportation without gravity or atmosphere would be well suited for nuclear.
|
I should have included a in my post. I meant that in jest.
Battery is a fine fuel tank for some transportation uses. In certain cases, the Tesla trucks will likely be the right solution concerning total cost of operation, reliability, etc.
Same with EVs for commuting purposes. My parents don't need 2+ gassers for their almost exclusive around town trips. A Nissan Leaf will cover 99% of their trips at 2 cents per mile in electricity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Wow, that slipped right past me. Easier said than done.
Think of all the effort being poured into fusion reactors, on the assumption that all the energy boiling off the surface of the Sun comes from beneath the Chromosphere rather than through plasma interactions with the planets and galax[y/ies].
Then think of that effort being put into Thorium reactors.
|
See what I do; depriving people of their sarcasm and not signaling when I'm being facetious?
Of course there are more promising technologies we should be exploring, but when have the masses been good at employing "common" sense or reason?
Last edited by redpoint5; 12-22-2017 at 12:27 PM..
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-21-2017, 11:01 PM
|
#50 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 2,653
Thanks: 301
Thanked 1,178 Times in 807 Posts
|
But the battery is really has a poor amount of energy storage compared to the weight. A Tesla battery weighs what, 1200 pounds? That's 150 gallons of gas or on the other side a Tesla's 300 mile range would only require 8 gallons of gas or 65 pounds of fuel in a under 30 pound container, under 100 pounds total. That's what makes a great mobile source of energy, lots of energy in a light weight.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Hersbird For This Useful Post:
|
|
|