Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Electricity don’t grow on trees

By

There are a few things to understand about electricity at this scale:


1.  Generally speaking, you can’t store it.  Rare exceptions exist for variable flow hydro power, but with almost no exception, the electricity being used now must be met by generating electricity now.


2.  More electricity is used during day than night, during weekdays than weekends/holidays, and more in summer than winter, winter more than spring and autumn.  This is “obvious” once some thought is paid to it.


3.  Given (1) and (2), there must be enough generational capacity to meet peak demand: the hottest summer weekday.  This means that many generators are idle some or most of the time, since they need to be available on days like yesterday, but aren’t needed during anything but the worst cases.


So what?  Well, we’re running out of capacity to meet peak demand.  The alternatives are two: either build more capacity, or reduce demand.  But, here’s the important thing: you’ve got to build capacity that is capable of generating during peak demand, or it can’t help with the close calls of peak demand.


This is where Cape Wind comes in to play.  Does the wind blow off shore during really hot days?  As pointed out by The Wind Farmers Almanac, sometimes.  This means that Cape Wind can not help reduce the need for building more peaking stations.  What Cape Wind can do is reduce the frequency that peak stations are actually used, as well as reduce the amount of electricity generated by coal, oil, and natural gas, which reduces price and pollution simultaneously.


If projects like Cape Wind can’t help make sure there’s enough capacity to generate electricity on the hottest weekdays, what do we do?  Generally speaking, there are two choices: diesel fuel power plants like the peaking plant proposed in Chelsea (coincidentally, but irrelevantly, proposed by the same folks who want to build Cape Wind), OR solar power.  Generally speaking coal and natural gas are out, because the facilities are too expensive to build if you’re only going to use them some of the time.  Solar, however, is a fantastic alternative.  It turns out that the sun shines brightly when things are really hot — when demand peaks.  There are two choices for adding peak capacity: dirty foreign imported oil plants, or expensive solar cells.


I favor solar cells in spite of their cost, because they reduce tUSA’s dependance on foreign oil, offset carbon emissions whenever the sun is shining, and can be used during peak demand.  Yes, they’re more expensive, but I think the added externalities of diesel peaking plants are far higher.


In the mean time, do me a favor: start turning stuff off when you’re not using it, both at work and home.  Lights, the television, whatever.  Bump the AC from 68 to 70, or from 70 to 72.  Install an electronic thermostat that allows you to more finely control your heating and cooling.  Only buy energy star appliances.  Save yourself some money in the long run and less electricity, particularly during times of peak demand.  After all, electricity don’t grow on trees.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I ended up on this site that offered lots of energy star rated stuff for this region:

    <

    p>
    Energy Star Lights

    <

    p>
    Somehow I navigated to this page: Change a light pledge where you can get a free compact fluor bulb sent to you. 

    <

    p>
    I submitted a couple of weeks ago, and haven’t seen the free bulb yet…but I’m hopeful…

  2. Thanks. Also check out the “carbon neutral” tips that Gore and company recommend http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/whatyoucando/index.html

    <

    p>
    Turns out all those battery chargers etc… consume 5% of the nation’s power…

    <

    p>
    Walk around your house and count:

    <

    p>
    Print heads that need to be kept warm (pretty much every HP printer)
    Wireless phone chargers
    cell phone chargers
    internet routers, hubs, dsl/cable modems
    palm pilots charging in their base
    digital clocks (nightstand, microwave oven, vcr)
    DVRs, TV’s that start up quickly

    <

    p>
    And these were the things I could think of in my house – we have four printers, six wireless phones, two cell phones, two network hubs and a broadband modem at least 8 digital clocks (vcr, microwave, oven, DVR and five alarm clocks), computer speakers…. shop battery chargers for the electric drills 

    <

    p>
    arrrgh…

    <

    p>
    We have only one small air conditioner for my office and we cool the house with a 36″ whole house fan – our neighbors think we are nuts but AC is not worth it for the few days a year that we really need it (like yesterday, everyone hid out in the home office – cozy but cool đŸ™‚

    • I recently started putting all of my “electronic” appliances on common power strips with an “off” button.  Now I switch off my entire desk (LCD monitors with power, USB hub, printers, laptop, etc.) and separately my DSL modem and wireless router.  The only thing that remains turned on when I am not home is my Tivo and cable box and fridge.  I’m conflicted about the Tivo/cable box, but I don’t want to miss my shows! đŸ™‚

      • What a great idea.

        <

        p>
        I need to get a UPS for my computer in case the power fails while I’m working…but those can be completely shut off if I recall.

        <

        p>
        What else in the house stay on even when they are “off”? Can we find a comprehensive list for this? Climatecrisis.net has some listed, I suspect there’s more.

        <

        p>
        Like for instance, should I unplug my paper shredder?

        • Well, some things that do stay on:

          <

          p>  * anything with a remote control “on/off” button  * anything that has a standby mode — so a shredder that shreds as soon as you put the paper in almost certainly is consuming power 24/7  * anything with a digital display that shows time, etc 24/7

          <

          p>
          Now — before you go yanking power plugs out of the wall left and right, be thoughtful about just how much power those devices are consuming, and that if you keep plugging and unplugging the device, you’ll stress the circuits and the cable of the device itself, which may lead to it dying sooner.

          <

          p>
          Power switches like in surge protectors are a better idea, but sometimes it just ain’t worth it.  A digital alarm clock uses very little power; you’ll save far more energy by   – securing your building envelope  * make sure windows close securly  * make sure doors close securely, with a door sweep  * use foam insulation spray inside the walls but on the outside of light switches and power outlets on exterior walls  * if you have pull-down attic stairs, make sure the stairs are insulated when in the “up” position

          <

          p>  – don’t heat/cool unnecessarily  * put an insulation jacket on your hot water heater tank  * cover/close vents in unused rooms  * put on a sweater in the winter; take off your shoes and socks in the summer  * install and program an electronic thermostat to fine tune your heating and cooling  * try to avoid washing clothes in hot water  * hang your clothes to dry when possible — it saves energy and wear & tear on the clothes

          <

          p>  – consider replacing your fridge: modern energy efficient refrigerators are far more miserly with electrons; also, does your next fridge really need to be as big as your last one?  Consider downsizing.

          <

          p>
          So, beware of electrical vampires, but be aware that there are far bigger wastes of energy going on in your home; work to curtail those first for maximum savings.

          • Do chargers not attached to their device consume energy?  I don’t think so.  My cell phone charging cradle without the cell phone doesn’t do anything except sit there.  Same with the wall chargers without a load at the appliance end.

            <

            p>
            How much juice does a TV on standby use?  Hardly any … I know this from powering a TV, DVD and VCR on a boat with 120V/AC converted from a 12V/DC battery bank.  The amp meter doesn’t register when the devices are on. It reads zero; it’s an analog meter so perhaps it’s not 0.000 but the current drain is too small to move the needle.

            <

            p>
            By contrast, run an 1,800 watt hair dryer and you can watch the meter draining the batteries.

            <

            p>
            I think former VP Al Gore is over-estimated for effect.

            <

            p>
            By the way, all your engery saving tips are great, money saving ideas.  Operative phrase is “money saving.”  While it’s fine to be energy concientious, there’s more incentive to conserve when people are motivated by cost savings.

            • The red light on the Palm charger?  That indicates its readines?  It’s on all the time.  Negligible, but there.  It’s the number of gizmos that add up.

              <

              p>
              I charge my cell phone and palm with a cigarette lighter thingy in my car.

              <

              p>
              BTW -did you guys hear the story about how air conditioning is responsible for OBESITY? We do not sweat as of yore, and do not lose weight!

              <

              p>
              I am in Maine (76 degrees), with no air conditioning, at a local hot spot to check my email, and to check on you guys.  Oh – wait – should I have let you know I’m only checking the MassGOP intermittantly?

              <

              p>
              Shepherd – to the rescue!

            • Appliances don’t have much of a peak load, but we’re talking 24/7.  In contrast, an 1800 watt hair dryer, used for 15 minutes, is only on for 1% of the day — consuming a total of .45 kWh per day.  A television on standby ranges from .7W to 14W (source).  So, that’s a total ranging from .016 kWh/day to .336 kWh/day.  Per television.  Now, consider how many televisions are plugged in within tUSA, and how many usages of hair dryers there are per day.

              <

              p>
              The 5% of electrical usage (not home energy usage) is pretty accurate.

        • By the way, what I really want to do soon is buy a remote controlled socket like the one on the link so that it’s really easy for me to turn things off.  But I’ve actually found that I don’t really need that stuff anyway.

          <

          p>
          Generally speaking, anything with a transformer (usually looks like a 3″x2″ black box) should be unplugged (printer, laptops, etc. are under that category).  Most other things (like a lamp) are not drawing electricity while they are in the ‘off’ position because nothing is “pulling” the electricity (a transformer on the other hand, does pull electricity so that it can transform it to the type of electricity required by the appliance).

          <

          p>
          One note though, I do think that nowadays there are some “smart” transformers that will only turn on if they have an appliance plugged on that requires electricity.  Quick test to see if you have one of those: leave it plugged in and not attached to its appliance and touch it to see if it’s hot after a couple of hours.

          <

          p>
          I’ll start the list:
          – Some TV models (with a “standby” button)
          – VCR / Tivo / Cable box
          – Anything with transformer (most cell phone chargers and office electronics)
          – Microwave
          – DSL / cable internet box
          – Digital phones / answering machines
          – Fridge

          <

          p>
          You probably don’t want to turn off ALL those things when you aren’t home (like your fridge) but just to know.

  3. Heating and Cooling costs, the largest energy expenditures in a home, are only as good as the ability of the room to hold its tempature. Older New England homes are leaky and drafty with regards to energy.

    <

    p>
    Luckily, with the rampant condo conversions going on, there has been one upside: Most of these gut renovations have meant new insulation in the walls and at the door and window jams.

    <

    p>
    I have a 1-year-old gut-renovated second floor condo in a two family in Malden. I set the air conditioning to 75 when I get home from work and that can be frigid.

    <

    p>
    Also being less drafty means I smell less of my neighbors cooking, or at least I think I do.

  5. Right on stomv, we have got to watch out for the peaks not only because they cost us hard money (i.e. much higher energy clearing prices), but also high peak loads hurt us environmentally because peakers, plants that only operate to meet an abnormally high demand, are usually very inefficient and much dirtier than our aggregate supply.  You might like to keep an eye on the forecast!!

    • another link coming from the above page is the hourly demand.  Notice that it peaks at 17:00 (5:00 pm).

      <

      p>
      So, want to reduce usage?  Go to work early (and avoid traffic!) and leave early (and avoid traffic?!).  By bailing out early, you’re helping reduce peak load and reduce traffic.  If your boss questions your leaving early, explain to him that you’re doing it for the children!

  6. I stayed in several hotels in Europe last year that had a clever way to make sure lights were turned off when the room was not occupied.  When you entered the room, there was a slot near the door that you needed to insert your electronic key into in order to be able to turn on any lights.  When you left, you took your key and all the lights went out.  I know lights aren’t terrible energy hogs, but I guess it adds up.

    <

    p>
    Some people can be scared into being careful engery consumers (watch An Inconvenient Truth).  Higher prices would force peole to change their ways faster.

    • “Higher prices would force peole to change their ways faster.”  Still the best way towards conservation — price.

      <

      p>
      In many ways, $4 a gallon for gas might be a good thing for the US if it get people to change their energy consumption habits.

      <

      p>
      One way NOT to change those habits is for Al Gore to lecture us and, God forbid, govern us that way.

    • No pun intended.  Read what you wrote Beth I initially agreed with you and have often said that although they hurt, high prices seem to be an “answer.”  However something dawned on me, what do we do when more and more people cannot afford gas?  I guess what I am saying is that we are trying to punish those people who drive the 100 passenger SUVs that generally only have one person in them driving in heavy traffic but in reality we are punishing the guy who is driving the 15 year old rusted out Ford Escort because now he can’t afford to fill his tank.  I am not sure high prices are the way but I don’t know what to do instead.

      • But what we can do to soften the blow is:

        <

        p>
        1.  Adjust laws so that we foster more affordable housing at all scales and sizes within metropolitan areas.

        <

        p>
        2.  Ramp up mass transit.  Improve quantity and quality.

        <

        p>
        3.  Foster telecommuting.  Most folks will never be able to work from home, but so many more could than do — both in private industry and government jobs.

        <

        p>
        4.  Feebates.  You charge an additional tax for low mpg vehicles within their class, and use that money to subsidize rebates on high mpg vehicles within that same class.  This way, when he does go to buy a new car, he can choose a car with high mpg for cheaper than he would have otherwise.  In two (car) generations, there will be higher mpg used cars on the market, so when he goes to buy a used car, he’ll have a larger supply of high mpg vehicles and hence will likely be able to afford a used car with higher mpg, thereby lessening the blow of high gas prices.

  7. Nice posting on standby losses for electricity.  Other items to watch for:  home theatre subwoofers, powered computer speakers, video game machine adapters.

    <

    p>
    Home Depot has some Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFL) that are sold in a set of six for something like $8-9.  These things come in a variety of sizes and power:  they use 20-25% of power as an incandescent lightbulb for the same light.  We have them throughout the house.

    <

    p>
    I have provided a billing method that would reward conservation of electricity below, and I would like some opinions on this:

    <

    p>
    Money is a powerful influence in everyone’s life.  But who pays attention to their electricity usage?  Very few.  Peak power plants are expensive, and renewable energy is available, if only for the cost of the facilities to collect it.  To fund these projects, those that use the most electricity could actually be made to help pay for them.  I know an electrician who has to shut lights, TVs, and radios off in large homes with no one in them when he visits for work during the day.  This is not conservation.

    <

    p>
    The proposal would set up bands of power usage, each with its own billing rate:  as more electricity is used, the rate goes up.  For example, the first 200 kWh @ $0.06/kWh, second 200 kWh @ $0.07 kWh, etc…, seventh 200 kWh at $0.12/kWh, eighth at $0.14/kWh….  Smaller increments would be needed so that people could see savings with less energy usage.  One drier load typically consumes 5 kWh….

    <

    p>
    With a policy such as this, an electric company can help reduce demand, and raise money to build solar/wind projects in town.

    <

    p>
    Our electricity usage is typically ~320 kWh/month!

    <

    p>

    • You run into some general “fairness” problems with tiered pricing.

      <

      p>
      1.  Different sized families.  A family of 5 will need more energy than a family of 2.

      <

      p>
      2.  Different housing stock.  If I can only afford an old house with leaky windows, I’ll pay more.

      <

      p>
      These problems make it difficult to enforce a tiered system.  That doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea; just that its got hurdles.

      <

      p>
      There’s another way to foster an environment where utility companies have reason to encourage conservation.  Stop paying the utilities a percentage of usage!  Currently, NStar makes more money if I use more electricity.  Instead, design the system so that they make money based on quality of service.  They make $x if I have 100% power availability, regardless of how much I use.  They make less as power availability goes down.  This way, they have incentive to keep demand low, since the variance will be reduced and it will be easier to keep quality of service high.

  8. Any device in your house that has a circuit board requires DC voltage (Direct Current). Essentially all circuit boards run on direct current. (A typical computer motherboard runs on 5 Volts DC)

    <

    p>
    Direct current is generated by either batteries or Alternating Current (AC) converted to Direct Current. Batteries must be recharged with direct current. AC is what comes out of the wall, DC is what comes out of batteries and AC Adaptors. Cars use/supply DC voltage.

    <

    p>
    In the home or office, our DC devices get their power from AC via an AC Adaptor. The AC Adaptor consists of a transformer and a rectifier. The transformer steps the voltage down from 120 to whatever the device needs, the rectifier converts the AC voltage to DC voltage.

    <

    p>
    Many devices have their transformers and rectifiers hidden inside. Desktop computers, for example, have “Power supplies” which take AC from the wall and put out DC at two voltages one for the motherboard the other for the diskdrives.

    <

    p>
    Most (but not all) printers have their ac adaptors “on-board” as do traditional CRT monitors. Laptop computers, some LCD monitors, palm pilot bases, external disk drives, cell phone chargers, wireless phone chargers, etc… have their AC adaptors off-board. I call these adaptors “Bricks” (when you carry a laptop through airports, “brick” is the right analogy đŸ™‚

    <

    p>
    You will usually find the “brick” at the end of the power cord with the AC prongs sticking out of it like this:

    <

    p>

    <

    p>
    The better AC adaptors put the “brick” somewhere in the middle of the cords. Why are they better? Because these types of “bricks” don’t block outlets in traditional powerstrips and wall outlets. Not too long ago someone figured out the “brick problem” and started making power strips like these:

    <

    p>

    <

    p>
    As I indicated above, the brick usually contains a tranformer and a rectifier circuit. The recitifier circuits are boring to look at. The transformers are only a little less boring to look at. Here are a couple:

    <

    p>
    Toroidal

    <

    p>
    Split Bobbin E-I  Plug-Pack  Conventional E-I
    (E = Voltage, I = Current from the equation
    E=IR,  Voltage = Current times Resistance)

    <

    p>
    Ok I’ve covered a lot of ground on this, here is why.

    <

    p>
    IT turns out that any device that has a transformer in it, uses electricity, even if there is no load attached. A good name for these devices is “little vampires” because they always suck…

    <

    p>
    So your Cell phone charger (an AC adaptor) you leave plugged into the wall uses a tiny amount of electricity. Naturally, if you put a switch between the wall and the charger, the charger will not use any electricity. (Read some of the other comments above, some people put all their little “vampires” on a switchable power strip.

    <

    p>
    Most Paper Shredders use an AC powered motor and have a power switch built into the paper feed. It turns itself on as you feed paper through it and turns itself off when finished. So a shredder typically does not use any electricity when it is not running. However, if the shredder has a little green light that is on all the time, guess what – it’s using juice…

    <

    p>
    Again, any device that has a circuit board and runs on AC current, requires a transformer. Even when turned off, that transformer may draw electricity (it depends on where the switch is. If the switch is between the outlet and the tranformer, no electricity is used.)

    <

    p>
    Hope this helps…. Mark

  9. is worth more than a megawatt built. Here is why.

    <

    p>
    Power plants–even baseload ones–are sometimes not available. on the other hand, the savings from an energy-efficient appliance or bit of insulation dispatches its benefits exactly when they are needed–that is, when the light bulb or air conditioner or heating or cooling unit is used.

    <

    p>
    Energy efficiency avoids pollution, transmission & distribution equpment and maintenence, and the nasty little “transition charge” (which is to pay for nukes, mostly) on your electric bill.

    <

    p>
    Also, if you care about global warming, energy efficiency can ramp up and start backing out greenhouse gases basically right away. There are essentially no siting issues. It’s cheaper than supply, too.

    <

    p>
    All in all, you’d be better off with a megawatt of efficiency installed than a megawatt of generation.

    <

    p>
    Not that you can’t have both, but boy are people stuck in the supply-side mindset.

    • for every Watt of electricty saved, you are actually saving about 3 watts of energy.

      <

      p>
      Seabrook Nuclear Power station is rougly a 1 Megawatt electric power plant. That means it needs about 3 Megawatts of thermal energy.

      <

      p>
      Typical power plants are about 30 to 35% efficient…

      <

      p>
      m.

  10. Wash and dry laundry at off-peak hours (i.e., not 5 p.m.) because those appliances draw heavy wattage.

    <

    p>
    A few years ago, when I lived in Seattle, the lakes that provided hydroelectricity were at low levels, and the TV stations all suggested this because peak electric use meant lots of water had to be flowing out the dams.  So I did my laundry around 6 a.m. or after 9 p.m.

  11. and build more nuclear power plants.  This seems to be overlooked when considering clean energy options.

    <

    p>
    Yes I’m cognizant of the waste issue, but what does France do?  They reprocess everything but a sliver of fissionable U-235.  From a WSJ article today (subscription needed):

    <

    p>
    “France recycles all its fuel rods and has never had any plutonium stolen. As for the remaining 2% of the fuel rod — the highly radioactive transuranic elements and fission byproducts — it is all stored in a single room in Le Havre.”

    <

    p>
    Don’t we reprocess our spent nuclear fuel?  If not, why not?

    • On their plus side, little emissions (some from the mining of radioactive materials, the trasnfer, the processing, etc) and they reduce the need for importation of oil and natural gas.  While not clean, nuclear power is far cleaner than most fossil fuel production.

      <

      p>
      On the down side, disposal is an issue.  So is terrorism.  It’s also not clear that it is price efficient, given the tremendous subsidies tUSA’s gov’t gives to the operation and construction of plants.  There’s another significant problem though, closely related to my initial post: nuclear power is baseload only.  In other words, you look at how much demand for electricity there is on a weedend at 3am in the Spring or Fall, and you can really only build enough capacity to generate that much.  Everything above the lowest valley must be served by non-nuke.  Why?  You can’t turn nuclear power on or off quickly.  It doesn’t cycle.  They can really only operate safely and efficiently if left on 24/7.  So while I don’t think the entire baseline is currently nuclear (meaning there’s room for nuclear power usage in New England to grow), it does have a finite usefulness well below 100% of power consumed. (fn 1)

      <

      p>
      Personally, I’m not opposed to nuclear power.  However, I’d like to see us really give greener energy a shot first.  Let’s build more nuclear facilities after we’ve invested many millions installing wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, small-hydro, and tidal power generation first.

      <

      p>
      (fn 1) On a side note, time based metering can help push usage off-peak.  It’s currently done for large industrial consumption, but needs to be expanded.  If I know it’s materially cheaper to run the washing machine and dishwasher on nights/weekends, I’m more likely to do so, thereby skimming the peak lower and increasing the valleys.  This has the effect of reducing the need to build new peaking plants, allows plants to operate more efficiently (for more hours per day), and reduces prices as a result.

    • Larded in subsidies of all kinds, cooed over by the intelligensia, and the subject of much uncritical media coverage lately–the only things that seems to be overlooked is its dismal economic performance and its potential for nuclear proliferation and terrorism.

      • “Larded in subsidies of all kinds, cooed over by the intelligensia, and the subject of much uncritical media coverage lately–the only things that seems to be overlooked is its dismal economic performance…”

        <

        p>
        Without heavy federal subsidies and tax breaks, according to an analysis written by Bill Koch, MA industrialist, Cape Wind would have a negative return on investment.

        <

        p>
        Not that I’m opposed to wind power.  But don’t criticize nukes when one can level the same charges at wind turbines.

        <

        p>
        (Koch is owner of Oxbow Corporation, former America’s Cup winner, and black sheep sibling of Koch Industries, KC, Kansas.  His analysis was published in a May 22, 2006 Wall Street Journal op ed piece.  I can email to you … let me know bostonshepherd (at) verizon (dot) net.)

        • and I’d rather zero out all the energy subsidies, at least on the supply side, than go with the priorities we fund now. (Note: Not holding my breath.)

          <

          p>
          The only reason the good stuff needs these subsidies is to level the playing field a little with the bad stuff, which gets the lion’s share.

          <

          p>
          I would argue, though, that on the merits wind power deserves subsidies and breaks that nuclear does not (I mean it’s been more than fifty years for crissakes, when do the training wheels come off?). Also that the subsidies are very different ones both in kind and scale, and also that wind turbines can’t melt down or be used to make weapons of mass desruction.

          <

          p>
          I read Koch’s op-ed piece in the Journal with interest, btw. But do you really mean to say that nukes deserve a free pass from this kind of criticism because Cape Wind is not Adam Smith kosher? That seems a bit of a non sequitur and I do not agree.

        • The reality is that nearly all forms of energy generation are subsidized.  Additionally, there are some forms which have detrimental externalities: they have additional costs that the user doesn’t bear; society bears.

          <

          p>  * Coal: air pollution, water pollution, decimating scenery.  * Natural gas: pipeline digs or massive LNG tankers, (less) air pollution.  * Diesel: air pollution, risk of oil spills, dependancy on foreign oil.  * Nuclear: some mining problems (minor vs. coal), waste disposal, risk of catostrophic accident or attack.  * Solar: pollution during manufacturing.  * Wind: Some folks find them ugly.

          <

          p>
          So, all have detrimental externalities.  Which are most costly?  I’d argue: oil, coal, gas, solar, wind, from highest to lowest.  The industries aren’t paying for these externalities; they’re a cost borne on all of us.  So, if we (a) got rid of all energy subsidies, and (b) made the industries pay taxes/fines/fees equal to their detrimental externalities, I suspect you’d find that wind power and solar power suddenly became much much more cost efficient, and we’d stop seeing any new coal plants for a while.  We’d also see the price of electricity double almost immediately.

    • We don’t reprocess nuclear materials because anyone that can do that can make weapons-grade nuclear materials. Which means that we would only want to trust the government to reprocess the materials. But if the government does it, then it is socialism. So we can’t do it in this country because too many idiot conservatives can’t admit that the government should do some things and too many idiot liberals automatically oppose all things nuclear for anyone to effectively counter the conservative argument (I’m not caliming conservatives or liberals are idiots, I’m saying there are too many idiots on both sides with knee-jerk reactions opposing this idea for it to ever get anywhere).

      <

      p>
      From what I understand, reprocessing the fuel rods would make nuclear energy cheaper than most other forms and get rid of the waste disposal problem (or at least make it so small as to be negligible). But I’m going from what I remember when I went on a field trip to a nuclear power plant in 7th grade, so the information might be propoganda, out of date, or misremembered.

      • or at least make [the nuclear waste disposal problem] so small as to be negligible

        <

        p>
        Um, negligible?  Not so much.  It would certainly make the quantity smaller, but there’s this thing called a half-life.  You’ve still got to “wait it out” thousands of years.  You still have to put it someplace.  You still have to deal with NIMBYism and transport problems.

        <

        p>
        So, while the quantity of problem is reduced, the quality of the problem remains.

  12. This is not to say don’t conserve.  Do conserve.

    <

    p>
    But there’s no way — no way — we’re going to conserve our way out of building more power producing plants. 

    <

    p>
    When I moved to Boston 25 years ago, the population of the US was around 210,000,000.  Now it’s 300,000,000.  Conservation is NOT going to satisfy that sort of growth in demand for electricity and other power sources.

    <

    p>
    Considering many major appliances, commercial activities and industrial processes have become much more efficient, yanking the plugs on all my idle power supplies, TV’s and DVD’s seems silly.

    <

    p>
    At least I build all my computers with lower-power AMD chips instead of Intel’s power-hunger CPUs.  I also look for highest efficiency PC power supplies which can save 10% ro 20% on a 400 watt load which operates 12 to 18 hours daily (even if it’s 100 watts at idle)…now that’s meaningful.

    • But there’s no way — no way — we’re going to conserve our way out of building more power producing plants.

      <

      p>
      To the contrary, we already have conserved our way out of building many more power plants.

      <

      p>
      I’m not saying we never need to build new capacity. But, we can’t build our way out of the current crisis, because there isn’t enough time.

      <

      p>
      (Well, I’m talking about global warming, actually, not the havok that so-called deregulation has wreaked on the capacity situation. But even there efficiency is the cheapest, cleanest, easiest, and least painful choice.)

  13. I changed all my bulbs to flourescent and unplug regularly almost everything that is warm to the touch (how I was told to decide what was using energy) except the refrigerator and the microwave. My electric bill is at least 10% lower. The bills were immediately 10% lower, then as I got my act together, the bills went down 20%, but my life style changed too.
    No loss in quality of life, either. With no a/c I hear the birds in the morning.
    Thanks for the discussion.

Archives