Technology Green Energy - your thoughts?

[TheLoveBandit]

Taken from the AI thread:

All that [snipped AI growth discussion] to say power consumption is growing VERY fast. Some are shifting to liquid cooled racks to deal with the heat. Yeah, coolant and electronics aren't a natural fit. Moreover, the US power grid can't keep up. If all the major players are in California, and it has had brown outs and rolling blackouts for years....that ain't gonna work. We can't supply America's power demands today, no way we can keep up with what AI will demand in the future. This isn't a fear of mine, more of a "wonder what we'll do to address that?" I think the move by CMs to (mid) west states is both for cheaper land, but also for lands where the power grid can be grown to match demand, as opposed to trying to put this on a Cali grid that needs a complete overhaul. Still, that says the grid can be grown...it doesn't address the actual power supply.

I don't intend to drag politics into this thread, I will only state I hope Trump's effort to 'drill baby drill' is intended to provide some of the power needed here. Moreover, I'm keenly interested in compact fusion as a potential energy source:

Compact Fusion

Discover our revolutionary approach to nuclear fusion, leveraging compact design and rapid development cycles to harness powerful energy comparable to the sun.

www.lockheedmartin.com

Nuclear fusion is the process by which the sun works. Our concept will mimic that process within a compact magnetic container and release energy in a controlled fashion to produce power we can use.

A reactor small enough to fit on a truck could provide enough power for a small city of up to 100,000 people.

Building on more than 60 years of fusion research, the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works approach to compact fusion is a high beta concept. This concept uses a high fraction of the magnetic field pressure, or all of its potential, so we can make our devices 10 times smaller than previous concepts. That means we can replace a device that must be housed in a large building with one that can fit on the back of a truck.

Nuclear is indesputably cleaner than fossile fuels, more reliable than green energy. Tho, I'm more excited about the portability, or you can have several in an area to support a larger city. Case in point, I've heard of 3 mile island (the long ago shut down nuclear plant) being used for this type of service. The gain is that connections to the grid are already in place, minimal investment required to adapt the new technology. The trade off is safety/security. We certainly don't want a small nuclear reactor on the back of a truck available for mobile terrorism I imagine existing infrastructe (ie 3MI) has security in place that can be adapted, but I foresee these portable fusion trucks being used in more public areas as well. We will need to figure out some security for those for both sabatoge and for theft.

EDIT: To add, I recently heard that the US power demand for AI will grow to consume 99% of our current available power by 2028. 3 Freaking Years and AI will need that much, which we obviously can't give it as we still need to run the rest of the country. So, starve AI and/or grow more power...because I don't think anyone will tolerate rolling blackouts and occasional brown outs (ie California). Personally, I also see an imperative need to update the power grid nationally to handle this growth.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

I am interested in everyone's thoughts on Green Energy. I know the most recent US administration put billions towards it (much of which is getting clawed back), meanwhile other nations around the world are taking a range of positions. Germany shutdown the majority of their fossil/nuclear (traditional) energy sources and have become wholly dependent upon Russian oil for energy. China meanwhile continues to build 1k additional power plants per year - tho that is starting to fall off a small bit, they are currently at 3x the coal powered output of the US, I believe. Canada and AUS are shutting down their coal power plants, while Trump is trying to restart many in the US. Africa laughs and continues burnng dung for heat and energy.

So, we've seent he HUGE push towards green energy over recent decades. I believe most will say it is a noble and just cause. But, do we sacrifice today our existing resources and heavily subsidize these green efforts with tax dollars to 'force the issue' or do we let the free market decide by making green energy more efficient and cost effective to compete against these fossil fuels? What's your take?

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Reference article:

China is the world's leader in producing solar panels that they ship elsewhere (EU & US), but they are also using them at home:

Wild Video Shows Entire Mountain Range in China Covered With Solar Panels

A breathtaking video shared on social media shows a mountain range in Guizhou blanketed in solar panels as far as the eye can see.

futurism.com

 

[kiely]

To be brief and as not political as possible, it all seems to be nothing more than marketing.

And to push the envelope a bit more it can just be an attempted narrative dialectic ! haha

There is monetary gain, however, in Energy now isn't there.

My thoughts : Nice try.

 

[kiely]

Anyway .....

This presentation is saying that a lot of the "Green Revolution" is nonsense, deceiving and misleading.

It's a great video for intelligence discourse with a good interesting take on science and faith also, in the initial focus.

And with political debating being put aside this is more of a brilliant, common sense, inclusive, hopeful

and an inspiring way for humanity to try to get behind it all together relating to these circumstances.

It seems to be more of a rational stance relating to the "Climate Change " crowd also.

~~~~~~

Humans probably can have some impact on all of our environments that can be negative and we probably do have to protect the ecology to some degree.

There isn't anything really ideal and for that matter firewood could be 100% renewable when nothing else is.

Wind turbines don't rebuild themselves. Solar panels don't rebuild themselves.

Energy isn't created or destroyed. Just changed from one form to another. Involving the amount of energy that is unavailable for doing useful work.

Meaning .... when it costs more energy to produce energy it can definitely contribute to economic challenges in the concept of energy returned from the

energy actually invested.

~~~~~

And world population definitely is an exponential. A good listen and very interesting topic with relevance to our world.



Nice one !

 

[someguyontheinternet]

people need to stop being so scared of nuclear energy. its one of the best ways we have right now to produce huge amounts of energy but everyone is so scared they don't want any near them

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Watched the whole video, kept wanting him to be on 'my side' to support my preconceived notions, or be on 'the other side' so I could poke holes. The presentation was pretty even handed, and not taking a (political) side inasumch as it was simply stating 'this is where we are as a world, and how certain players are moving forward....and we ALL need to do better through a combination of paths'.

Spot on about China continuing to use more coal than anyone, building a new coal power plant every week. But I did not realize India's population just surpassed that of China and India wants to attain the same industrial growth (obvious, but overlooked) as China to include leaning heavy on coal as well. I learned recently China is half EV and half gas powered vehicles. Of course, their economy is dictated and controlled by the gov't so the mix of vehicles is determined regardless of which is more cost effective or how it impacts carbon production.

I liked his quick walk thru showing power consumption by country/region, and how the western world (Europe & North America) are greatly dialing back their carbon production....but it is primariliy by offshoring the product manufacturing going on in China, and growing in SE Asia, where fossil fuel use is soaring and continuing to climb. It's not that we're greener, it is that we pushed the carbon production elsewhere - we still share the same atmosphere and it isn't accounting for the true big picture on this.

He also highlighted that 'green energy' isn't really green either, in that he showed the Lithium mines and the environmental damage from the batteries after they run out of useful life. He also showed the mass graveyards for wind turbine blades - they don't break down, they have to be buried for 100s of years in hopes the decompose a little.

This kinda pivots to my thoughts on the subject overall. I'm not against green efforts, but it needs to be done in an open and free market. He mentions gov't mandates don't work, and I agree. Subsidizing EV cars and their production is forcing consumers to pay (via tax to subsidize the product) for something they may not want, and what is currently not ecomically feasible, and as he showed it may not be much greener in the long run. I'm not saying we need to run on fossil fuels forever, but we do have centuries of it left currently. I have faith in technology to develop to a point where greener energy exists and can displace fossil fuels economically as well as environmentally, but that innovation doesn't happen when the green products are being subsidized...the pressure isn't there to 'get better'. Moreover, using the fossil fuels uses them up and forces the rest of the world to say 'oh shit, we need an alternative before we run out'. I see that as also forcing the innovation.

We need a LOT more energy, everywhere. Developed countries won't drop their use. He did a great exercise showing the world lit up, then dimmed that view by dropping coal, then lng, then...others down to just wind and solar which provide 6% of current global needs. The world dimmed to 6% of it's current poweris going back to the literal dark ages. Developed nations will need current energy levels and a lot more (AI demand, population growth, etc), while developing nations need it as well (he spoke to African villages getting electricity for night lights for the first time ever). The need is global and real, and we need more. I believe we can depend on fossil fuels for the next century failry comfortably, and use that time to develop feasible alternatives that can be implemented more practically.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

people need to stop being so scared of nuclear energy. its one of the best ways we have right now to produce huge amounts of energy but everyone is so scared they don't want any near them

Aye, I think this is the real path forward. The safety and technology for building nuclear plants is about 50y more advanced than those that showed issues such as 3-mile Island (built 1979), Fukashima (built 1971), or Chernobyl (1972). We can build much safer and efficient nuclear plants these days, if they can get permits. Which, to me is wild, given how green they are. I meanGermany shut down their last 3 active plants in 2023, the US has been decomissioning since 2013 but still has ~100 up and running.

More interesting to me is SMRs (Small Modular Reactors).

Advanced Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

Information on advanced small modular reactors and the Department of Energy's Small Modular Reactor Licensing Technical Support (SMR-LTS) Program.

www.energy.gov

They put out 10-100s of mWh (standard nuclear plant is 500-1k mWh). But the SMRs are smaller (footprint), cheaper, easier to place in locations where traditional nuclear plant is infeasible, and you an daisy chain them for more power. You can place them at existing power (coal, nuclear, lng) plants that already are connected to the grid and have the SMR take over, or place some near cities and towns to get the power much closer to the demand.

Over in the AI discussion, I may have stated that I had heard the demand for power for the AI industry is growing so fast that it will outstrip available power very soon. For current power production in the US today, by 2028 the AI industry will need 98% of that. So yeah, we are gonna have to make more power, and soon.

 

[kiely]

I believe we can depend on fossil fuels for the next century failry comfortably, and use that time to develop feasible alternatives that can be implemented more practically.

I am surprised they allowed him on ted talk but he stated a lot of statistics and listed resources for us to do the math and figure out the equation so to speak for the end result.
Water is a constant but requires energy to harvest it.

But the whole concept of resources and depletion is a very interesting subject matter.

Leading to Peak energy and Peak resources. Quite a concept to try to grasp.

And very concerning. Thank you for the thread.

I'll be back !!

 

[kiely]

Watched the whole video, kept wanting him to be on 'my side' to support my preconceived notions, or be on 'the other side' so I could poke holes. The presentation was pretty even handed, and not taking a (political) side inasumch as it was simply stating 'this is where we are as a world, and how certain players are moving forward....and we ALL need to do better through a combination of paths'.

Spot on about China continuing to use more coal than anyone, building a new coal power plant every week. But I did not realize India's population just surpassed that of China and India wants to attain the same industrial growth (obvious, but overlooked) as China to include leaning heavy on coal as well. I learned recently China is half EV and half gas powered vehicles. Of course, their economy is dictated and controlled by the gov't so the mix of vehicles is determined regardless of which is more cost effective or how it impacts carbon production.

I liked his quick walk thru showing power consumption by country/region, and how the western world (Europe & North America) are greatly dialing back their carbon production....but it is primariliy by offshoring the product manufacturing going on in China, and growing in SE Asia, where fossil fuel use is soaring and continuing to climb. It's not that we're greener, it is that we pushed the carbon production elsewhere - we still share the same atmosphere and it isn't accounting for the true big picture on this.

He also highlighted that 'green energy' isn't really green either, in that he showed the Lithium mines and the environmental damage from the batteries after they run out of useful life. He also showed the mass graveyards for wind turbine blades - they don't break down, they have to be buried for 100s of years in hopes the decompose a little.

This kinda pivots to my thoughts on the subject overall. I'm not against green efforts, but it needs to be done in an open and free market. He mentions gov't mandates don't work, and I agree. Subsidizing EV cars and their production is forcing consumers to pay (via tax to subsidize the product) for something they may not want, and what is currently not ecomically feasible, and as he showed it may not be much greener in the long run. I'm not saying we need to run on fossil fuels forever, but we do have centuries of it left currently. I have faith in technology to develop to a point where greener energy exists and can displace fossil fuels economically as well as environmentally, but that innovation doesn't happen when the green products are being subsidized...the pressure isn't there to 'get better'. Moreover, using the fossil fuels uses them up and forces the rest of the world to say 'oh shit, we need an alternative before we run out'. I see that as also forcing the innovation.

We need a LOT more energy, everywhere. Developed countries won't drop their use. He did a great exercise showing the world lit up, then dimmed that view by dropping coal, then lng, then...others down to just wind and solar which provide 6% of current global needs. The world dimmed to 6% of it's current poweris going back to the literal dark ages. Developed nations will need current energy levels and a lot more (AI demand, population growth, etc), while developing nations need it as well (he spoke to African villages getting electricity for night lights for the first time ever). The need is global and real, and we need more. I believe we can depend on fossil fuels for the next century failry comfortably, and use that time to develop feasible alternatives that can be implemented more practically.

 

[kiely]

I have been trying grasp the concept of fusion and fission also.

Though the green energy, as well, gets kind of wonky at times.

I'll be Back !!!

 

[kiely]

And just to lighten it up a bit again.

NO ONE would complain about replacing oil if there was a REAL alternative so to speak.

Not sure why these electric cars are so expensive !!!

We already have them. Been around since the 30s.

They’re called Golf carts.

With a few modifications, added safety features, Bing!

Stylish.

~~

And along with just about everything else.

Electricity, also, comes from oil, coal, or natural gas for the most part...

So unless you have your own energy supply, you are just paying someone different to burn fuel for your car...

It's a nice pipe dream.

I'm still a bit of old school lifestyle on this one.

 

[kiely]

I am still trying to learn too and stay on topics.

This to me focuses on awareness of resources and also water is mentioned as well.

Sorry if I repeated.

A good reminder of working energy into resources. Another pretty data video.

 

[neversickanymore]

people need to stop being so scared of nuclear energy. its one of the best ways we have right now to produce huge amounts of energy but everyone is so scared they don't want any near them

We certainly need to consider what vulnerabilities nuclear power has for nations during kinetic combat. They present significant NIGHTMARE targets for kinetic warfare and terrorism warfare. Look at the Chernobyl disaster and what those Heroes sacrificed and accomplished to contain it. Miracle Eforts.

 

[jasperkent]

National Weather Service issues Alaska's first-ever heat advisory

For the first time ever, parts of Alaska will be under a heat advisory — but you can put an asterisk at the end of that term.

www.ksl.com

 

[kiely]

^^^ Oh no. It is hot.


edit : There are a lot of fires where I am at right now. We always wonder if someone is starting them or who ?!

But yes, it is hot .... but the fires make it even hotter.