Ferrari Mailing List: Re: Don't read if you have had enough BS

[Jim Conforti (lndshrk]

At 02:14 PM 5/20/2009, philville dejazzd.com wrote:

>    ONLY VIABLE source of that much energy is nuclear.

    Phil, the key is VIABLE.

    There are many "academic" sources of energy.

    Hydrogen is one example - where does the Hydrogen
    come from?  Heat or electricity.

    It's right back to "The Chicken or the Egg"

    Not to mention that conversion of any form of energy
    into Hydrogen gas has an efficiency cost - the best
    methods are around 50% efficient.

    Solar electric is another example.

    Currently the "best" panels are 20% efficiency.

    Using the solar insolation of Phoenix as a base,
    (I'm using 5.65 kW/h m^2 as the basis here)
    you'd need 3376991 square KILOMETERS of solar
    cells in a similar environment to produce the
    current US electric needs. (almost 4 trillion kW/h)

    That's basically a 1200 x 1200 MILE solar panel.

    With panel separation for following the sun, it's
    easily double that in dimensions - so you pick which
    2400 x 2400 MILE swath of the US is to be depopulated
    and covered w/ solar cells.  Then you still have your
    issues w/ the efficiency of transmission.

    The key is in "The Curve of Binding Energy".

    Nuclear Fission and Nuclear Fusion pack HUGE amounts
    of energy into a gram of matter.

    Fission is here now and should be utilized until we can
    properly harness fusion, should that occur.

    Jim