dagblog - Comments for "But we don't need no gov'mint interference"

When I'm feeling flatulent,

Anonymous PP — Mon, 28 Apr 2014 17:21:24 +0000

When I'm feeling flatulent, could use a methane converter - much more efficient, I move faster, and it slows global warming. Maybe grant-boy could study the issue and write a policy paper bout it?

Solar panel on your

Qnonymous — Mon, 28 Apr 2014 01:52:51 +0000

In reply to Me - in recent discussions,

Solar panel on your ass.

Whole lotta problems solved.

Genome mapping may be a bad

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 20:15:45 +0000

In reply to I guess one thing we need to

Genome mapping may be a bad example, but the DARPA internet work certainly reaped benefits, as did optical research that spun off CDs et al... I imagine some good NHS work at one point as well.

Me - in recent discussions,

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 20:13:52 +0000

In reply to More specific? Me or

Me - in recent discussions, utility providers have been describing the shift to smaller, better located energy sources to fulfill demand.

More specific? Me or

EmmaZahn — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 17:45:30 +0000

In reply to Probably should have been

More specific? Me or you?

Local to me means more like DC distances than AC distances but not necessarily a DC grid (but that might be better).

Renewables that would not work in my locale are wind, geothermal, water. Photovoltaics and other solar could but would be spotty during rainy months so the area would likely always be a net electric importer.

Probably should have been

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 17:34:10 +0000

In reply to Aesthetically giant wind

Probably should have been more specific - grids are getting more localized, so windmill & solar farms will be closer to their destinations.

Aesthetically giant wind

EmmaZahn — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 17:16:03 +0000

In reply to the aesthetics of the

Aesthetically giant wind farms may be somewhat attractive -- from a distance -- like a field of tall wild flowers is. What I dislike about them and the less attractive giant solar fields that are springing up is that they are being built with the aim of either preserving or supplanting the existing giant utilities. They will also likely need to produce a lot more electricity that will actually be needed to make up for what is lost in transmission over vast distances.

I was hoping future energy technologies would follow a similar path to that of computers from mostly massive to mostly personal. Now I think for that to happen, distribution would need to be separated from production. In other words, divest the utility companies of their grids. Basically, the same thing that happened to AT&T a few decades ago. They kept most of their lines, the Baby Bells and new players leased those to provide service to end users who were no longer locked into whatever AT&T chose to provide on its own timetable. Some of the new players installed their own lines and launched their own satellites forcing AT&T and the baby Bells to compete. Now we have smart phones.

This next part is may be utopian but think about it anyway. There is a lot of concern about what jobs people will do as robotics and AI take over more and more tasks and leaving more and more people without incomes. But you know what robots will need? Electrical energy. And that can be produced in so very many ways -- from water, wind, sun, heat, kinetics -- but it is very hard to store. Wouldn't it be great if we could figure out a way to pay people for the energy can produce?

I guess one thing we need to

Michael Maiello — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 17:09:00 +0000

In reply to "The government, free from

I guess one thing we need to consider is that many private sector were really built on the backs of "failed" public works projects. I don't just mean that they rely on infrastructure, the rule of law, and the U.S. military (though most of that is true) but that there is no successful private genome mapping without decades of publicly funded works to create the foundation to make breakthroughs possible.

the aesthetics of the

Elusive Trope — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 15:49:39 +0000

In reply to You lose a lot of energy

the aesthetics of the windmills is a subjective thing, of course. Personally, I find them actually pleasing as far a man-made structures go.

I haven't done a ton of research on it all, but (1) if there was a new state of the art grid in place that cost would probably go down, and (2) places like Indiana which still depend on coal-based energy would be able to shift away from the disaster that is coal mining.

But like I said, I haven't done much research on it all, but I would think that most regions have their windy areas so it wouldn't be Nebraska sending to Seattle, rather eastern Washington sending to Seattle.

You lose a lot of energy

Anonymous PP — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 15:31:44 +0000

In reply to I just recently drove back

You lose a lot of energy moving electricity from Nebraska to Chicago or Washington, and while windmills are cool in a few places, having miles and miles of windmills is a bit ugly.