RV Fuel Issues & Prices - Post 'Em Here!

SRT wrote:


These people touting alternative energy obviously haven't checked other countries that have tried this path. What do you when the wind doesn't blow, or is cloudy for many days? So far it has been an expensive boondoggle for the taxpayers.

You use the excess alternative energy for pumped hydropower storage. 22 pumped storage units with more than 2,400 MW of capacity were installed in Europe from 2000 to 2010 to help with the variability of wind and solar generation. In contrast in the US 2 units with 40 MW capacity were started in 2011 but few other projects.

Here is an example of a US pumped storage station in operation since 1985 in Virginia:

https://www.dom.com/about/stations/hydro/bath-county-pumped-storage-station.jsp

Here is a list of pumped storage hydropower stations greater than 1000MW around the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pumped-storage_hydroelectric_power_stations

tomman58 wrote:
Dick A. "We are still paying inflated electrical rates due to that fiasco. What it boils down to is all these projects are incentivized by politics, big money, and politically connected financiers. The average consumer is left to pay for the boondoggles of others."

Don't you see the irony of the current drive for alternatives that has the same stumbling blocks of the past? As alternative energy gets its legs (thanks to the correct political climate) and the climate change begins in earnest to affect the farm lands and other climate disasters (thinking of the lack of water here) the need for that nuclear energy is going to be needed just to provide the power needed to convert sea water to fresh for the west.
Sounds far fetched but the actions needed must be today and not when the monster is upon us. Water is becoming more and more a factor and the need to product it greater then ever.
We'll never see the answer but we can begin to realize the problem.

These people touting alternative energy obviously haven't checked other countries that have tried this path. What do you when the wind doesn't blow, or is cloudy for many days? So far it has been an expensive boondoggle for the taxpayers.

Dick A. "We are still paying inflated electrical rates due to that fiasco. What it boils down to is all these projects are incentivized by politics, big money, and politically connected financiers. The average consumer is left to pay for the boondoggles of others."

Don't you see the irony of the current drive for alternatives that has the same stumbling blocks of the past? As alternative energy gets its legs (thanks to the correct political climate) and the climate change begins in earnest to affect the farm lands and other climate disasters (thinking of the lack of water here) the need for that nuclear energy is going to be needed just to provide the power needed to convert sea water to fresh for the west.
Sounds far fetched but the actions needed must be today and not when the monster is upon us. Water is becoming more and more a factor and the need to product it greater then ever.
We'll never see the answer but we can begin to realize the problem.

I seldom opine in this discussion but as I did a college research project on alternative energy resources back around 1980 I am probably as well versed on this subject as most posting on the topic.

Back in the day we had a nuclear energy drive run by the Washington Public Power System - later renamed "WHOOPS". While the ideas and perception of power needed in the future was not correctly estimated and the cost overruns finally killed the project. This was one of the biggest government agency bond defaults in history.

We are still paying inflated electrical rates due to that fiasco. What it boils down to is all these projects are incentivized by politics, big money, and politically connected financiers. The average consumer is left to pay for the boondoggles of others.

The transition from wood to coal, coal to oil, now oil and coal to natural gas, and then natural gas to renewable energy each have taken and will take many decades. Each transition from one dominant fuel to another has taken 50 to 60 years. For example coal supplied 5 percent of all fuels by 1840 but still supplied only 50% by 1900.

Oil did not surpass coal until 1964.

Read about it in Scientific American.

Anyone who would discount the drive, willpower and ability of Tesla is a fool. This guy has his eye on the ball and even though he has stumbled (a common occurrence in the progressive world) he knows what he wants and is convinced he can and will do it.
There are always naysayers that point to failures but thank God for the Wright brother, Henry Ford and so on for not paying any attention to them and getting the job done.
Henry would say.... No matter if you think you are right or wrong you are right.

LindsayRichards wrote:
I just got the new Samsung J5 Smart Phone. Very slick. Spain's alternatives have been a real disaster. Germany is retreating. I went to LED's on my coach for boondocking and have AGM batteries. The US's hydro is in a declining state (very unfortunately). France is over 80% nuclear and it really helps them. When you say coal is still used in 40% of the US's power generation. That is a lot. It is 12 times greater than wind and solar. It is losing out to CNG though. The US uses 1/6th of the coal used in the world today. The recent EPA ruling had nothing to do with global warming, but were about SO compounds. The global warming decisions are yet to come. They will result in additional scrubbers being added at coal plants and the cost passed on to consumer of electricity. Our air and water are at their cleanest in the last 50 years.

I remember going to disneyland as a kid and couldn't believe the smog. Amazing change now and 10 times the cars. (number pulled out of my a$$) From what I gather natural gas is a better alternative than coal and may work as a stop gap. Re hydro, I think the US will be able to buy more Hydro from Canada as it continues to develop its hydro output. What Canada's problem is now is its delivery grid. 20 to 30 years out of date. The power will be online before the delivery grid is ready by about 12 to 15 years.

Efforts are being made all over the world but if you want to do some interesting googling it is surprizing how much china is now doing to to improve air and water quality. Although they produce a tremendous amount of polution dictated by the sheer size of their population, western nations (with the US and Canada leading the way) still produce more pollution per person than they do by a factor of almost three.

I hope we can look back in 30 years and see the kind of improvements that we have seen in the last 30 years. BUT, I think we need to take chances on new technologies now and not wait until someone else has proved them out. I would rather see subsidies in these areas than big oil which we all know will eventually not be near as much of a player in the real world.

JMHO

I just got the new Samsung J5 Smart Phone. Very slick. Spain's alternatives have been a real disaster. Germany is retreating. I went to LED's on my coach for boondocking and have AGM batteries. The US's hydro is in a declining state (very unfortunately). France is over 80% nuclear and it really helps them. When you say coal is still used in 40% of the US's power generation. That is a lot. It is 12 times greater than wind and solar. It is losing out to CNG though. The US uses 1/6th of the coal used in the world today. The recent EPA ruling had nothing to do with global warming, but were about SO compounds. The global warming decisions are yet to come. They will result in additional scrubbers being added at coal plants and the cost passed on to consumer of electricity. Our air and water are at their cleanest in the last 50 years.

LindsayRichards wrote:
I am all for forward thinking and like I said will be the first to have it, but the simple truth is it isn't here yet. I wish it was, but it isn't. Many countries have lofty goals, but haven't come close. Germany is backing away as quickly and has 6 coal plant being built. I am a big fan of nuclear, but we haven;t built one in 25 years. We have wasted tens of billion dollars for political cronies to build alternative energy plants that failed. Just read today about an electric truck maker going under. We spent over $35 million on it. To me, we would be much better off spending that money on research and less on the politics. Lets get it right and stop spending billions on things that we know will not ever be competitive. We spent $3.5 BILLION on that NV/CA concentration solar plant and it produces electricity at triple the cost of natural gas and has a lot of environmental problems. We keep building the same
old stuff.

Yah I have read about some of the things you mentioned. Not always encouraging. But we are bound to stumble. The cheapest kW Is not necessary the best KW and expensive power forces us to conserve it or find better ways to use it. The LED bulb is an example of that. Regardless, discussion is good. Watching and reacting to other nations failures and succeses is important and there are some succeses out there. As part of my curriculum I have to read articles that interest me in foreign online newspapers and periodicals. On a daily basis I read articles in Spanish French and German. The interest in renewable energy including hydro, wind and solar is considerably higher in Europe, or at least it appears that way by the numbers of articles a available to read.

Like I said. Discussion is good and I appreciate your take on things. Forgive the spelling errors. I'm on an iphone.

I am all for forward thinking and like I said will be the first to have it, but the simple truth is it isn't here yet. I wish it was, but it isn't. Many countries have lofty goals, but haven't come close. Germany is backing away as quickly and has 6 coal plant being built. I am a big fan of nuclear, but we haven;t built one in 25 years. We have wasted tens of billion dollars for political cronies to build alternative energy plants that failed. Just read today about an electric truck maker going under. We spent over $35 million on it. To me, we would be much better off spending that money on research and less on the politics. Lets get it right and stop spending billions on things that we know will not ever be competitive. We spent $3.5 BILLION on that NV/CA concentration solar plant and it produces electricity at triple the cost of natural gas and has a lot of environmental problems. We keep building the same
old stuff.