Oil headed for 70 bucks s barrel. Here we go.

monkey44 wrote:
OK, how about those NY apartment buildings twenty-thirty stories, a hundred apartments, a hundred families. Put one solar complex over the entire roof, you might get enough power to feed electric to the top ONE floor or even TWO, or THREE, what do the other ninety families do?

Well, they bring in power from an external grid?? And that cost as much to build and maintain as any other power source. We do not have perpetual power production anywhere ... It costs use and maintenance fees, and soft labor, and engineers. That's not inexpensive, even if renewable and sustainable. Unless you individually grow your own groceries and create your own power, there will always be a cost equation.

Actually there is no need to expect rooftop solar to be the 100% solution. This is not metric electricity... solar power can flow through the existing grid just fine.

Some local solar would reduce the need to improve the existing grid as power demand grows.

Yes solar does come at a cost and that cost is lower than coal.

OK, how about those NY apartment buildings twenty-thirty stories, a hundred apartments, a hundred families. Put one solar complex over the entire roof, you might get enough power to feed electric to the top ONE floor or even TWO, or THREE, what do the other ninety families do?

Well, they bring in power from an external grid?? And that cost as much to build and maintain as any other power source. We do not have perpetual power production anywhere ... It costs use and maintenance fees, and soft labor, and engineers. That's not inexpensive, even if renewable and sustainable. Unless you individually grow your own groceries and create your own power, there will always be a cost equation.

We should never have given up on whale oil lamps. There is an endless supply of whales. Isn't there? What is it with all this newfangled hydroelectric stuff? Who needs progress?

Will it be too much to ask to keep yourselves updated first before yapping? LOL

Elon Musk's proposal to have a 100 x 100 mile land somewhere in Arizona, Nevada or New Mexico to power the whole country is confirmed feasible by the experts.

He did it in Australia for a whole city in 100 days against $50 million bet that he won.

Anyone wants to put into a pool that kind of money to bet against the proposal?

wanderingaimlessly wrote:
The "end of oil" people are the same ones who in the 80's expected their new 2010 commuter vehicle to fly them to work on a "Mr Fusion" powerplant.

Yes technology will eventually make advances and change how we do things.
And switching to electric vehicles MAY eventually make sense. BUT you still need a source of the electricity as well as a means of supplying it. Both of which have proved daunting because of enviro whacko's fighting against the sources and the maintenance and construction of the delivery systems.
A house requires a solar panel set nearly as large as the home. How do you fit that into a population dense area like LA? And businesses, factories, they require many times their footprint in solar coverage to function.
So after complaining that "It's the worlds air, and that we all breathe the same air" you move the production to somewhere that you don't see them. They are still there, pumping out as many pollutants as ever, but you get to pat yourself on the back because YOU cant see them.
And you compound the issue by then having to install delivery systems to bring that power from many miles away into your area. And with another group of greenies demanding you not disturb brush, you get the new joy of wildfires caused in large part by the very people that did all of this to save the environment.

Until you get that "Mr Fusion" or some other technology functional on a large AND economical scale, big oil will be here. Personally I hope for Hydrogen cells, but something will come.
They may be pumping natural gas in many regions, but some source that can be readily transported will still be needed.

The heck with population density being a factor in sunny Southern California, how about the population density in the Eastern Cities where high rise apartments are the dominate domicile and the sun isn't shining as brightly and as often as it does in Southern Cal. Covering the entire city of New York with a seamless array of solar panels would only provide a fraction of the power consumed, and where do you place the massive stockpile of batteries necessary to power the city at night and on days when the sun doesn't shine? And don't forget that those batteries will require SURPLUS solar generated power over and above the daytime usage to charge so the power generating needs during the daytime will need to be multiple times the actual daytime consumption. Solar may very well be a component of the power grids of the future, but it will likely be only part of the solution for at least this century.

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:

wanderingaimlessly wrote:

A house requires a solar panel set nearly as large as the home. How do you fit that into a population dense area like LA? And businesses, factories, they require many times their footprint in solar coverage to function.

Where you are peeps getting your information?

My bro-in-law has a new house in LA suburbs with just half the roof with solar panels and it is already supplying his home with all the electricity he needs when his a/c is on 24/7.

Solar panels are now becoming standard for new development in CA.

Power companies are still resisting co-generation where homeowners can get paid for electricity supplied to the grid when their solar panels have surplus. So imagine if houses get their entire roof covered with solar panels, or Tesla's more efficient solar roofs. It can supply the city and/or commercial and industrial needs.

Hate to break the news but Power companies must buy the excess. Nothing to resist. Your BIL may be able to do as you claim but what works in the suburbs of LA will not work in the suburbs of Buffalo NY or Minneapolis MN. How many panels are on the roof doesnt mean anything. Its not a sq ft to sq ft equation.

wanderingaimlessly wrote:

A house requires a solar panel set nearly as large as the home. How do you fit that into a population dense area like LA? And businesses, factories, they require many times their footprint in solar coverage to function.

Where you are peeps getting your information?

My bro-in-law has a new house in LA suburbs with just half the roof with solar panels and it is already supplying his home with all the electricity he needs when his a/c is on 24/7.

Solar panels are now becoming standard for new development in CA.

Power companies are still resisting co-generation where homeowners can get paid for electricity supplied to the grid when their solar panels have surplus. So imagine if houses get their entire roof covered with solar panels, or Tesla's more efficient solar roofs. It can supply the city and/or commercial and industrial needs.

Cummins12V98 wrote:

We will do what is needed. War? Not a chance. Simply push a few buttons and it’s game over!

That's what they told us back in 1967. How did that work out?

Reisender wrote:
Wonder how long till the pump price reflects it.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/oil-soars-as-u-s-killing-of-iran-general-stirs-fear-of-conflict-1.1368724

Not to worry, we are sending thousands of troops that way.

Does anyone else remember "The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution"?

Australia is burning.

I thought we had a sticky for this subject.