Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here is a food for thought for green innovation enthusiasts:
Green plants in the United States collect about 53 exajoules of energy
per year from sunlight.Americans consume slightly more than twice that amount,
however. Enthusiasts suggest that ethanol produced from corn and cellulosic biomass
could replace much of the oil used in the United States. Yet the 18 percent of the US
corn crop that is now converted into 4.5 billion gallons of ethanol replaces only 1
percent of US petroleum consumption.
Some of this "go green" stuff is nonsence, but some things are just common sense. I don't like the new twisted light bulbs, the shade of the light it gives off, I just don't like, so i wont use them. I cant imagine how an expensive light bulb is going to save ME any money on my electric bill.
I do however always hang my clothes out to dry. I don't believe in dryers, I can wait until the next day to fold my clothes, and put them away. I don't need anything dry within an hour. A dryer is the most wasted use of energy in the world that everyone can conserve on. Air dries my clothes for free, cant get better than that.
A dryer is a Godsend when the temps are 10 degrees for days at a time. I would hate to have to shovel a path to my clothes line and then collect my frozen clothes at the end of the day. I love to hang out from late March to November. But in the winter I will USE my dryer.
Here is a food for thought for green innovation enthusiasts:
Green plants in the United States collect about 53 exajoules of energy
per year from sunlight.Americans consume slightly more than twice that amount,
however. Enthusiasts suggest that ethanol produced from corn and cellulosic biomass
could replace much of the oil used in the United States. Yet the 18 percent of the US
corn crop that is now converted into 4.5 billion gallons of ethanol replaces only 1
percent of US petroleum consumption.
November 2006 / Vol. 56 No. 11 • BioScience 875
Cellulosic or algae based fuels are what we really need. The energy balance in corn-based ethanol is not good enough for it to be a mainstream fuel. It is a good octane enhancer.
A dryer is a Godsend when the temps are 10 degrees for days at a time. I would hate to have to shovel a path to my clothes line and then collect my frozen clothes at the end of the day. I love to hang out from late March to November. But in the winter I will USE my dryer.
Our apartment the LL cranks the heat up so high ( ugh ) that in the dead of winter I don't hang the clothes outside either, I use one of those racks, I wash at night, hang them on a rack, put it in front of the radiator and in the morning they are bone ass dry, fold and put away, and no one ever sees them.. LOL
but I know, in the dead of winter sure a dryer does the trick.
Cellulosic or algae based fuels are what we really need. The energy balance in corn-based ethanol is not good enough for it to be a mainstream fuel. It is a good octane enhancer.
Again. USA consumes twice the energy American green plants capture per year and store as carbohydrates, oils, cellulose, etc. Corn based or cellulose based ethanol or any plant based fuel, it will not cut it. Algae? I don't know if algae would live up to the hype, but it does sound as something capable of wiping out the remnants of ocean & sea life. Wanna play with that? Keep in mind that mankind cannot capture more than 0.5-1% of Sun energy without causing major climatic disruptions and instabilities. Sun energy is not an endless energy resource as some believe. At present typical rates of global energy consumption growth, in less than 100 years mankind would hit 1% mark, and then what?
Again #2, most of the "greens" are pondering the question "how to power current civilization "paradigm", current economic & social orders using different "renewable" energy means". And the answer to that question is set in stone. You can NOT do that.
Again. USA consumes twice the energy American green plants capture per year and store as carbohydrates, oils, cellulose, etc. Corn based or cellulose based ethanol or any plant based fuel, it will not cut it. Algae? I don't know if algae would live up to the hype, but it does sound as something capable of wiping out the remnants of ocean & sea life. Wanna play with that? Keep in mind that mankind cannot capture more than 0.5-1% of Sun energy without causing major climatic disruptions and instabilities. Sun energy is not an endless energy resource as some believe. At present typical rates of global energy consumption growth, in less than 100 years mankind would hit 1% mark, and then what?
Again #2, most of the "greens" are pondering the question "how to power current civilization "paradigm", current economic & social orders using different "renewable" energy means". And the answer to that question is set in stone. You can NOT do that.
You're wrong, about cellulosic ethanol and algae land use, but that's OK.
Where do you get this "estimate" for climate disruption?
The Sun's energy is effectively endless for mankind's purposes. Harvestable renewable energy using existing technology is about 100 times our needs.
The low hanging fruit in all of this is conservation. On a per capita basis we in the United States consume 5 times as much gasoline per year as our western European counterparts. People usually try to explain that away as a function of density, but Western Europe is actually slightly less urban than the United States. We consume almost 40% more gasoline per capita than the Canadians.
Aren't those energy-efficient lightbulbs supposed to be hazardous if they break or something? I heard that, but before I moved back home I used to use them since my place was mostly all carpet. I can't use them here I guess, I break too many lightbulbs.
Anyhow the only ways I've "gone green" are to try to use less energy, less gas, recycle more, and use those cloth grocery bags. All of this is easier said than done.
Keep in mind that mankind cannot capture more than 0.5-1% of Sun energy without causing major climatic disruptions and instabilities. Sun energy is not an endless energy resource as some believe. At present typical rates of global energy consumption growth, in less than 100 years mankind would hit 1% mark, and then what?
Now that's an interesting angle but this energy is released back into the atmosphere as heat. You turn on bulb and it produces heat. We're just borrowing it for a while.
I'd have to question your 1 % figure, I did some estimates a while back on how many BTU's we have released into atmosphere from coal and other fossil fuels compared to the BTU's delivered to the earths surface by the sun. The premise of the poster was the actual heat we produced through the burning fossil fuels was increasing the earths temperature which of course is absolutely ridiculous. Here is what I came up with using some very generous numbers for fossil fuel use:
Quote:
1,557,216,591,941,000,000 BTU's per hour is the mount of heat the sun delivers to earth.
41,160,000,000,000,000 BTU's per year from oil consumption in the US.
22,000,000,000,000,000 BTU's produced by coal within one year.
When we combine both figures the total BTU's for coal and oil comes out to 63,160,000,000,000,000 annually. To get a world total I'll throw out what I think is more than a fair figure. Do you think 20X what the US produces in year is fair? Using 20X we get 1,263,200,000,000,000,000 BTU's per year for worlds annual total.
When we divide that into the suns BTU's we come up with a figure of of 1.2.
Within 1.2 hours the sun delivers as many BTU's to the earths surface that us mere humans would produce in 1 year.
Even using modern amounts for the entire past century within 81 hours or a little over 3 days the sun delivers just as much heat to the earths surface as that produced by man over the last century.
Taking this bit further the annual output of the sun is 13,641,217,345,403,160,000,000 BTU's.
1% is 136,412,173,454,031,600,000 BTU's
If we divide the annual fossil fuel BTU rate of 1,263,200,000,000,000,000 into that we get 107.
We would have to consume 107 times the energy we are using now to get to the 1%, as an example the annual increase in the US for coal consumption is only a few percent so to increase it 107 times would be a centuries if not millenniums.
Last edited by thecoalman; 06-21-2011 at 01:27 PM..
Aren't those energy-efficient lightbulbs supposed to be hazardous if they break or something? I heard that, but before I moved back home I used to use them since my place was mostly all carpet. I can't use them here I guess, I break too many lightbulbs.
No. Internet legend, debunked by the science.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
