Jed, thanks for the link to the spreadsheet.
We do exchange electricity between european countries over here, but not
across 2000 miles that's for sure.
I couldn't agree more about CF, I am all for it, that's why I get so
frustrated that CF issues aren't addressed a bit faster and with more
efficiency, do we want to see this thing working in our lifetime I wonder?
Good night
Michel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:45 AM
Subject: Re: Simple comparison electric car versus gasoline
Michel Jullian wrote:
There may be no wind power in Georgia, but your electricity network may be
interconnected with other networks far away where there is wind power,
that's the nicety of these networks (makes up for their ugliness).
States with significant wind resources are thousands of miles away, and
you cannot transmit electricity that far. Georgia has no significant
renewable energy resources.
It is a shame you cannot transmit electricity 2000 miles because if you
could, we could establish a massive solar thermal plant in a 100 square
mile area of the Southwest desert, and generate all the electricity we now
consume. Or we could do the same trick with wind farms in North Dakota.
Alas, it is impossible. Someday high temperature superconducting wires or
hydrogen pipelines may allow electricity to be transmitted across the
continent.
Now would potential US wind power be enough to recharge all US automobiles
at some time or other of the night do you think?
Potential US wind power could supply more energy than you get from burning
the entire flow of oil from the Middle East. It could easily supply all of
the energy consumed by everyone in North America. For that matter, so
would a 200 square mile area of the desert. One hundred to replace all
electricity, another 100 to replace all other sources of energy.
Renewable energy such as solar and wind could easily meet all of our needs
indefinitely, if only we had the technology to harness it. However, it
would be thousands of times more expensive than cold fusion. (As are
present day fossil fuel and uranium fission.) If we develop wind and solar
power for the next 500 years, the price will fall until it is far cheaper
than today's energy, but it will never fall to anything like the level
that cold fusion could reach. Look at the 25 kW solar generator here:
http://www.stirlingenergy.com/imagesdet.asp?type=allsolar&imageID=11
This prototype costs hundreds of thousands of bucks, but look at the
materials and the size of the gadget. You can imagine that after 50 years
of manufacturing millions of these things the cost falls to, say, $5,000.
It is no bigger or more complicated than a small automobile. That would be
$200/kW, for with zero fuel cost, compared to $6,000/kW for nuclear plants
(where the fuel costs practically nothing), or $2,000/kW for wind (where
the fuel costs absolutely nothing). In other words, in 50 years these
things could easily produce electricity far cheaper than it is today.
Now think of a 25 kW cold fusion generator. After 50 years of intense
development, you can imagine one the size of today's 25 kW portable
generators that costs $1,000, or maybe even $500. It would have no moving
parts and it would last for 30 years, or maybe 50 years. (As far as I
know, thermoelectric devices in a pristine, sealed environment cannot
degrade much.) The gadget would not need an electric power grid. It would
work 24 hours a day, unlike the Stirling Energy 25 kW generator. It would
also serve as a space heater in a cogenerator configuration. Over the life
of the machine the heavy water fuel it consumes would cost a few dollars.
Clearly, that would reduce the cost of energy far below the levels you
could achieve with the Stirling generator. The only thing remotely
comparable would be 25 kW hydroelectric generator on your own property 50
feet from your house, in a climate where the stream never freezes or dries
up. Even that would call for much higher maintenance costs, and much more
expensive generating equipment which would have to be replaced more often.
- Jed
