Prepared Society Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
performing monkey
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Read this slowly.

Absolutely the greatest "joke" ever played... on US! :mad:

Let it sink in.

Quietly we go like sheep to slaughter.

Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DoE (DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY) during the Carter Administration? I don't, I wasn't born yet.

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn't think so!

Bottom line... we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency... the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.

Ready?

It was very simple... and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate...

The Department of Energy was instituted on 8-04-1977...

TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL ! :eek:

Hey, pretty efficient, huh?

AND NOW IT'S 2009, 32 YEARS LATER ... AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $27.2 BILLION A YEAR... THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE!

THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY ' WHAT WAS I THINKING? ' :confused:

Ah yes, good ol' bureaucracy. :rolleyes:

And NOW we are going to turn the Banking System & the Auto Industries over to THEM?

God Help Us !!!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
2,248 Posts
Do they handle all our off shore reserves?

I went to St. Lucia recently we have massive tanks there filled with fuel to use in an emergency.
 

·
Function over Form
Joined
·
524 Posts
Do they handle all our off shore reserves?

I went to St. Lucia recently we have massive tanks there filled with fuel to use in an emergency.
I visited their sites during a former employment. They've assumed a very diverse lot of responsibilities. Power line safety/standards, nuclear power, solar power, strategic petrol reserves, TONS of research, etc. It's frequently an uphill battle for funds and support... e.g., many people like what a nuke plant does, but no one wants one near them or wants to commit the funds to make it truly plausible with a minimum impact on the environment. Catch-22.
 

·
YourAdministrator, eh?
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
They actually do quite a few things, including such dependence on foreign oil reducing things like making speeches at commencement events.

For a government-operation, I've seen worse.

Department of Energy - Homepage
I just read a link from the site about advanced GeoThermal research: U.S. Department of Energy

U.S. Department of Energy-Website said:
WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced up to $338 million in Recovery Act funding for the exploration and development of new geothermal fields and research into advanced geothermal technologies. These grants will support 123 projects in 39 states, with recipients including private industry, academic institutions, tribal entities, local governments, and DOE's National Laboratories. The grants will be matched more than one-for-one with an additional $353 million in private and non-Federal cost-share funds.

"The United States is blessed with vast geothermal energy resources, which hold enormous potential to heat our homes and power our economy," said Secretary Chu. "These investments in America's technological innovation will allow us to capture more of this clean, carbon free energy at a lower cost than ever before. We will create thousands of jobs, boost our economy and help to jumpstart the geothermal industry across the United States."

These grants are directed towards identifying and developing new geothermal fields and reducing the upfront risk associated with geothermal development through innovative exploration and drilling projects and data development and collection. In addition, the grants will support the deployment and creative financing approaches for ground source heat pump demonstration projects across the country.

Collectively, these projects will represent a dramatic expansion of the U.S. geothermal industry and will create or save thousands of jobs in drilling, exploration, construction, and operation of geothermal power facilities and manufacturing of ground source heat pump equipment.

The projects selected for negotiation of awards fall in six categories:
  1. Innovative Exploration and Drilling Projects (up to $98.1 million): Twenty-four projects have been selected focusing on the development of new geothermal fields using innovative sensing, exploration, and well-drilling technologies.
  2. Coproduced, Geopressured, and Low Temperature Projects (up to $20.7 million): Eleven projects have been selected for the development of new low-temperature geothermal fields, a vast but currently untapped set of geothermal resources. This includes geothermal heat found in the hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells around the U.S., where up to ten barrels of hot water are produced for every barrel of oil.
  3. Enhanced Geothermal Systems Demonstrations (up to $51.4 million): Three projects have been selected for the exploration, drilling and development of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) to validate power production from deep hot rock resources using innovative technologies and approaches.
  4. Enhanced Geothermal Systems Components Research and Development / Analysis (up to $81.5 million): Forty-five projects have been selected to focus on research and development of new technologies to find and drill into deep hot rock formations, stimulate enhanced geothermal reservoirs, and convert the heat to power.
  5. Geothermal Data Development, Collection and Maintenance (up to $24.6 million): Three projects have been selected for the population of a comprehensive nationwide geothermal resource database to help identify and assess new fields.
  6. Ground Source Heat Pump Demonstrations (up to $61.9 million): Thirty-seven projects have been selected to demonstrate the deployment of ground source heat pumps for heating and cooling of a variety of buildings for a variety of customer types, including academic institutions, local governments and commercial buildings.
To me, it seems like they are doing what they should - advancing technology in such a way that there isn't a strong tie to other region's energy / power which can keep costs (transportation, transmission, etc) lower and more affordable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Boise, Idaho has been using geothermal heat and power since around 1892. In fact, the state capital building is the only one in the country which is heated geothermally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Geothermal is good, but like wind and solar, it is not enough. We need to go with what is clean and can produce abundant power virtually forever and that is nuclear. It is the only solution that makes sense and it can be done safely with the technology we have here in the 21st century. The DoE has responsibility for nuclear power.

The Japanese are working on small scale nuclear power generators and thinking outside the box and innovatively, as usual. Japanese firms to develop small nuclear reactors
 

·
I am a little teapot
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
I agre with set2survive. We all know NIMBY (not in my backyard) and none of us want to live downrange from a nuclear waste dump (much less a reactor facility) but the fact is, from what I've read, that there are so many fail-safes in place that current nuclear power plants almost cannot fail. Yes, there's that chance, but there's also the slim chance that my entire family may be run into a ditch and killed by a drunk driver. Does that keep us off the road? I really think nuclear power is the way to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
The answer may be nuclear power BUT not the current system.

The real answer is fusion plants instead of the currently operation fission reactors.

So how can this be done? Simple. Mine the moon for Helium-3. By using H3 as fuel, you will have a much cleaner, safer, more powerful power output while producing zero toxic waste as a byproduct.

How much would we need? Roughly 25 tons per year to power the entire United States. With the estimated amount available on the moon, we could power the US for around 450,000 years.

Why the moon? Because Helium-3 is only produced by the decay of material found in nuclear weapons on Earth. It could be manufactured, but it would be far too costly and dangerous to be beneficial.
 

·
I am a little teapot
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
Ok, that's an interesting point. Hadn't given fusion much of a thought. Is H3 the only fuel you can use for fusion with any practicality? I understand that uranium has a really long half life (don't know how long) so it hangs around for a long time, and plutonium, on top of being radioactive, is extremely toxic. So your stereotypical rusty drums in a mountainside somewhere are a horrible thought when it comes to that stuff.

I asked somebody who would know one time why they don't just load all the nuclear, hazardous, biological and other waste onto a big rocket and ship it to the sun. My logic is we'd be rid of the stuff, and it'd vaporize way before it polluted the sun, if that were possible. The answer surprised me. They lookid into it, but scrapped the idea for one reason. Say you have a huge rocket loaded with hundreds of tons of this stuff and it blows up on the launchpad or in the atmosphere? Or for that matter in space near Earth? I had to admit I hadn't thought of that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
I agre with set2survive. We all know NIMBY (not in my backyard) and none of us want to live downrange from a nuclear waste dump (much less a reactor facility) but the fact is, from what I've read, that there are so many fail-safes in place that current nuclear power plants almost cannot fail. Yes, there's that chance, but there's also the slim chance that my entire family may be run into a ditch and killed by a drunk driver. Does that keep us off the road? I really think nuclear power is the way to go.
I was born and raised less than ½hour from Big Rock Point nuke plant. I went there on field trips in elementary and middle school (in the early to mid 70's).

I also believe that nuclear is the way we need to go, unless all the NIMBYs go back to living in caves and not using electricity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Fusion reactors and mining the moon for H3 are subjects of research and speculation. A workable fusion reactor that can produce sustainable power has yet to be built, even as a laboratory model. We need something we can start buiding now, otherwise we will not have affordable energy in the not too distant future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Ah, see that is where you are wrong. A working lab model HAS been built by the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. But the lack of fuel makes it very expensive to operate.

The technology will work. But it will take several years.

Now, if all those oil companies out there would plan for their survival and invest some of those ill-gotten billions of dollars they have accumulated over the years into a private space venture, we could probably have working fusion reactors within the next decade.
 

·
I am a little teapot
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
But why? We have enough coal and oil to last for centuries!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
It's all still in the experimental stage of development, by "working model" I mean something that can be deployed now in the field to produce electricity. They just aren't there yet and in the mean time we need to use conventional nuclear power to bridge the gap until we can use fusion power.

From one of the links:
"A "fast track" plan to a commercial fusion power plant has been sketched out.[9] This scenario, which assumes that ITER continues to demonstrate that the tokamak line of magnetic confinement is the most promising for power generation, anticipates a full-scale power plant coming on-line in 2050, potentially leading to a large-scale adoption of fusion power over the following thirty years."

I guess we could burn coal and natural gas for the next 40 or 50 years, but that's not an attractive option.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top