[aprssig] Shack backup power

[Rudy Benner]

Very interesting. Thanks.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Charlie Gallo
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 9:58 PM
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Shack backup power


On 6/5/2011 Keith VE7GDH wrote:

> Charles KG2V wrote...

>> Have you actually been following the "known reserves"
>> of Hydrocarbon fuels (particularly Natural Gas)?

> Not at all....snip...

> OK. What do you propose we do after this 4 digit period of
> years has passed by? It won't direct you or me, but I would like
> to think that mankind can keep living on earth up until the time
> that the big bright object in the sky is extinguished. Look at the
> damage we have done in a bit more than 100 years. Just think
> of how much more we can do if there are hydrocarbon reserves
> sufficient to allow us to continue like this for thousands of years.

> With "huge" hydrocarbon reserves or not, would you recommend
> that someone NOT install a grid-tie inverter to help the rest of
> the country out as well as themselves?

> 73 es cul - Keith VE7GDH

Oh, I have NO problem with running any kind of solar power system, I've 
helped install 3 systems, including an old fashioned hot water system back 
in the late 1970s, and have worked with various systems.  I've even run the 
numbers for my house.  Unfortunately where I live (NYC), it doesn't pay with 
the distinct lack of rebates, where if I lived 2 miles east, it would (Con 
Ed has NO rebate program, LIPA does, which is why the Home Depots in Nassau 
have solar power classes, and the ones in NYC don't.)  I also have the 
disadvantage of a roof that basically has East and West exposures, with East 
blocked by a hill - can't even grow plants except for extreme shade 
tollerant.

I just don't like the "we're gonna run out of energy' tact when it turns out 
we won't (or at least any time soon, anyway)

I keep trying CFLs - in my OLD house, I think circa 50% of the lamps were 
CFL, and that was 10 years ago.  There is something about the fixtures (all 
ceiling cans) that just make them NOT work here - I actually get crazy short 
lifespans, as in shorter than an incandescent.  I've actually spent quite a 
bit changing windows, AC units etc to high EER units etc

Thing is, if you are REALLY, and I mean REALLY worried about this, you 
should be seriously pro modern Nuke designs with modern fuel reprocessing to 
eliminate the  waste storage issue.  The proliferation issue which caused 
President Carter to ban reprocessing (and which I belive RR lifted, but) is 
a 'closing the door after the horse is gone' issue, because we have a lot of 
'smaller' states making their own fuel at this point (Read Iran, North 
Korea, India, Pakistan, etc).  Either that, or be looking at the Thorium 
cycle

I can see and DO say "Let's try to cut back, look at what it does" without 
shall we say being Chicken Little, waste, of anything is downright stupid, 
BUT deciding where to put the most effort shouldn't be a matter of dogma, 
but a scientific decision, by EACH small group.  Food stream ETOH is 
extremely borderline, you can argue it it's a net positive/net negative on 
the waste/energy front, but we know it has done crazy things to food prices

Grid Tie solar is a fairly GOOD choice in many places, and whoever came up 
with the idea of doing the systems as grid tie should win some award

Wind, if you are in the right location can be good, but I do tend to worry 
about the unintended issues of wind disruption (and yes, it's measurable 
downwind from a big wind farm - hey, the energy comes from somewhere, eh?)

My only point is, saying " but it is our grandchildren
that will see what happens when we "run out of oil". is a mis-statement of 
the worst kind, that actually undermines a GOOD position, because it makes 
the argument look like it's based upon false assumptions

BTW the huge GOOD 'Green' thing about Marcellus shale gas is that there is 
enough of it (when I say there is a lot of it, I'm NOT kidding), that it has 
the potential to make burning Natural gas MUCH (and I mean MUCH) less 
expensive than burning coal (and it's MUCH cleaner), and has the potential 
to basically shut every coal powered plant in North America in a fairly 
short period of time.  The DOWN side is that it DOES require Fracking, which 
is extremely controversial, and in some places it HAS caused issues, but at 
the same time, they HAVE been doing fracking of oil fields for decades, so 
it's NOT like an unknown


-- 
73 de KG2V - Charles Gallo
Quality Custom Machine-shop work for the radio amateur (sm)


_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at tapr.org
https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig