Re: Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2

2005-03-06 Thread Horace Heffner
At 9:24 AM 3/6/5, Steven Krivit wrote:
>Horace,
>
>You may be care to send this to Gustav GROB email: info at uniseo.org. He
>may have an interest, as well as an influence to see something productive
>happen with your ideas.
>
>Steve


I appreciate the notion, but I barely have time to read vortex and float a
few potential memes as they come to mind on occasion.  Too many
commitments, too much research to do.

Assuming research into potentially ideal energy solutions like cold fusion
is to be suppressed, then a logical consequence must be to implement
interim solutions using existing technology, or technology readily
developed using existing engineering principles.  Superficially at least,
it appears supplying the world's energy needs renewably is technically and
financially feasible, and a superior approach in the long run to consuming
carbon basd fuels.  A push for a global renewable energy supply is possibly
a reasonable response to the suppression of research.  A huge amount of
work is required to do this in a planned fashion.  The alternative to
building teams to do this work is to float the ideas and let capitalism
take its merry course to success.

Regards,

Horace Heffner  




Re: Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2

2005-03-06 Thread Steven Krivit
Horace,
You may be care to send this to Gustav GROB email: info at uniseo.org. He 
may have an interest, as well as an influence to see something productive 
happen with your ideas.

Steve


Re Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2

2005-03-05 Thread Horace Heffner
I wrote: "However, emerging capitalists should have their noises in the
air.  The smell of money is there."

I meant to write: "However, emerging capitalists should have their noses in
the air.  The smell of money is there."

However, a little noise probably couldn't hurt if that's all it is.

Regards,

Horace Heffner  




Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2

2005-03-05 Thread Horace Heffner
I wrote: "However, emerging capitalists should have their noises in the
air.  The smell of money is there."

I wrote: "However, emerging capitalists should have their noses in the air.
The smell of money is there."

Regards,

Horace Heffner  




Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2

2005-03-05 Thread Horace Heffner
The following is an attempt to put into perspective the problem of
obtaining the world's energy needs by carbon free renewable means.

Table 1 - Current energy plant capital cost in $/W

Gas turbine  0.5
Wind 2.0
Solar tower  2.5
Nuclear  6.0

One MBtu is equivalent to 33.43 watts expended for a year.  Multiplying the
above values by 33.43 we can thus obtain energy plant cost in $ per MBtu/yr
assuming a plant life of one year.


Table 2 - Current energy plant capital cost
  (in $ per MBtu/yr, or $B per quad/yr)

Gas turbine  17
Wind 67
Solar tower  83
Nuclear 200

The above values have to be multiplied by 10^9 to obtain cost in $ per
quad/yr.  So, the above numbers represent the current cost in billions of
dollars per quad/yr energy creation capacity.   Thus multiplying the values
of Table 2 by 400 we have the cost of plant capacity to provide current
world energy needs of 400 quads:

Table 3 - Current energy plant capital cost in $T to supply world needs

Wind 26.8
Solar tower  33.2
Nuclear  80.0

If we discard nuclear energy as not cost effective, and assume half solar
and half wind energy production, we have 30 $T capital cost to provide all
the worlds energy needs by renewable means.  Assuming a 3 percent cost of
capital (reasonable assuming value of energy inflates too) we have an
annual cost of 1.5 trillion dollars to produce the 400 quads.  That is
(10^6)(1.500x10^12)/(400x10^15)$/MBtu  = $3.75 per MBtu.

If we triple the cost to include cost for novel energy transportation and
storage methods, we have a cost of $11.25 per MBtu.  This is very
competitive with the DOE 2003 costs of energy, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 - Current costs of energy in $/MBtu

Electric  25.20
Methane9.10
Heat. Oil  9.25
Propane   13.46
Kerosene  11.41

It appears the job of converting to renewable energy can be accomplished
starting now, especially where long trades are not required.  The capital
cost will ultimately be on the order of 90 trillion dollars, but invested
over the, say, 20 years required to accomplish the plant development it
will be about 4.5 trillion per year.

At $12/MBtu, the world energy requirement costs about 4.8 trillion dollars
per year.  The capital to achieve the conversion can be obtained by
doubling the cost of energy for about 20 years.  Considering most of the
energy is consumed on the continents in which it is produced, the cost
could be substantially less than that estimated, possibly by as much as 60
percent less.  The powerful effect of economy of scale has not been applied
either.

Unfortunately, as with a national renewable energy policy, all that is
missing is the political will to make it happen. It is even less likely to
happen on a global basis than a national basis.  However, emerging
capitalists should have their noises in the air.  The smell of money is
there.  They may well wipe out those unable to think in any terms other
than big oil.  The future is likely another example of survival of the
fittest and the adaptable.

Any corrections would be appreciated.

Regards,

Horace Heffner