The Future of Energy: A Realist's Roadmap to 2050

No realist has a road map to 2050. A realist would know that attempting to predict the next forty years just won't work, and its arrogant and over-confident. Do you really think we know all of the things that will effect our environment in the next 40 years?

My prediction: Ultimately, what a bunch of politicians dream up in some conference is meaningless. Like it or not, the market will determine exactly which energy technologies will prevail.

I would expect wind to continue to grow but it will be unlikely to make up more than 10-12% of total energy demand. Centralized solar will be far less than that contribution. Distributed PV from cheap organic cells that can be deployed on roof tops could add another 10-20% maybe. None of this is cheap of course; it requires infrastructure and technologies that haven't been invented yet.

That leaves 60-70% of energy demand to be made up, either in greater efficiencies or other energy sources. If they're going to tax fossil fuels, then assume it must be nuclear. Most of the hydro in the US is tapped, and the carbon taxes might finally make nuclear as attractive in cost.

Of course, either way, we'll all pay 10-20% more for everything because energy is required to produce and transport everything. Add that to other new taxes to finance the debt and entitlement spending and we'll all see a lower standard of living for ourselves and our heirs. Oh well, at least the enviros can feel good about solving a non-existent problem.

kstauff-

Global Warming isn't the only thing to consider when talking about the switch to renewable energy. Right now most of our oil comes from the Middle East, and when you combine the fact that we're getting oil from an unstable region, with the fact that oil reserves WILL eventually run out, and then also consider that the demand for oil from countries like China and India will only grow, well I don't know about you, but I'd rather not tie my future in with such a shaky resource.

When talking about total energy production oil isn't the only thing to consider. We produce most of our electricity with coal. While its true that coal is extremely abundant in the US, the extraction of coal is an extremely damaging and toxic procedure that sometimes requires the removal of entire mountaintops, flattening of local topography around the mine, and poisoning of the land so that the natural ecology is no longer able to grow there.

You don't have to believe in Global Warming to support the switch to renewable energies. And I personally think that getting energy from local sources which will provide local jobs is worth the extra cost.

bdhoro87: actually some predictions from 40 years ago are amazingly dead on, one example: Moore's Law.

stauff wrote: "Like it or not, the market will determine exactly which energy technologies will prevail."

It couldn't be stated better. So long as oil and coal are cheaper than alternatives, they will be the dominant source of our energy. There is so much infrastructure (including R&D) in oil and coal as energy sources that it will take a climate catastrophe to influence the markets enough to tip the balance.

Missing Wave Energy. The nwe Anaconda concept with big snakes can generated a lot of renewable energy.
See the video:

http://www.stichtingmilieunet.nl/andersbekekenblog/?p=7842

Milieunet Foundation is a non-profit organisation focused on awareness and change of behaviour by means of communication about waste, energy, sustainability, nature, environment, climate, human rights and international development cooperation.

You don't need to predict to make a plan. A good house lasts longer than 40 years- that doesn't mean you need to predict whether the site might get hit by a comet in 35 years before you can start pouring concrete. You just have to be reasonably certain the location is good, and then start building, then deal with challenges as they come. I'm glad they're moving forward with this. Also, realize that many states regulate their energy mix through renewable portfolio standards and laws which give tax incentives to renewable energy. So it's not a totally free market, and the switch may be faster than you expect.

Krao:

I do in fact agree with you on energy independence. It is the primary reason I support a level playing field for all types of energy production, including hydro, solar, wind, coal, gas, oil and nuclear. I also support he electrification of the automobile, thus allowing each of these sources act as transportation energy.

Your assumption that I don't believe in global warming (and its adherents often exhibit a "faith" in its predictions, regardless of fact), or more specifically, anthropogenic global warming, is correct. I believe it's largely fear mongering designed to reduce the amount of fossil fuels we use. The science is theoretical only, and thus far, actual observations contradict it predictions. Further, the models being used are incomplete and do not model the thermodynamic effects of cloud and thunderstorm formation, an admission made by the very authors of the models.

The worry is that we will run out of other resources as population demands continue to bloat, food and water in particular. Minerals will become more difficult to refine as the good lodes are depleted and the energy required to extract poorer quality sources becomes more expensive. We'll also have to cope with erratic climate. All or any of these may combine to ankle-tap our attempts to deal with the problems.
One thing we should be doing is making an enormous effort to stockpile all materials that could conceivably be recycled. Not because we need to at the moment, but because it will be cheaper than trying to dig them out of landfills 50 or so years from now.
As they say, we (and our children) are going to live in interesting times.

Wrong! As everyone knows, FUSION is the long term solution!

I would create some special type of accumulation power plants. When the power is plenty this Accumulation Power Plants will extract energy from the grid and will spin flywheels. When the power is needed it will be delivered back into the grid. Some more methods of storage can be envisioned.

What frightens me about this rush to these other energy sources is that we are repeating mistakes we have made before.

We know we have a problem - too much CO2 - so we go blazing off to divert energy from other sources to our use, and have absolutely no idea about the long term effect of this diversion.

We know from our small, nay minuscule, forays into this diversion that any of the mentioned technologies has the potential to supply all our power for a lot of years. But what is going to happen when we start harvesting this energy in massive amounts? Has anyone thought to apply our climate models to this?

What happens long term when we are diverting petawatts of sun energy away from the earth with our solar farms?

What happens when our geothermal energy harvesting cools the earth's mantle a degree or two?

What happens when we harvest 10% of our ocean's energy?

All these things can't happen? That's what the consensus was back when we started to pour crap into our oceans and atmosphere - everything we knew at that time was that these systems were self healing. And they were until we overwhelmed them.

But, you say, we have a climate emergency. Lets deal with that, then we can consider the long term effect of the cure.

Really? If you are in a burning boat, you better consider how much water you are using to deal with your problem before the boat sinks.

Good judgment comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement.

What about BIO-MASS?
We can have heat and even electricity, with just with crop or branch...
As their positive item
-it is cheap. It is posible to save more than 50% with bio-mass for boilers, instead of petrol fuel.
-it is local. We can reduce the petrol dependency.
-it creates new jobs. It is necesary to harvest bio-mass.
-it is clean.

OK...all very nice but one type of energy is missing Magnetic dynamos. Do not let the government fool you with propaganda bull. A zero point energy magnetic dynamo can be made with simple tools ...magnets and copper wire a few minor parts and you can run your entire house on a unit of predetermined size, no power grid needed. Do not be a slave to govermental interference. Make your own Magnetic generator. The only reason we dont have them now is because the government would not have control of us thru the power grid...

bdhoro87 obviously must have No capabilities of "Vision" whatsoever. Why would someone like that, who just bashes long term solid Scientific "Model Plans" for the fun of it even READ Popular Science in the FIRST Place?

I read in THIS Magazine in 1970 about the Space Shuttle, which was REALLY imaginative at the time. It launched into space in the early 1980's, probably before bdhoro87 was born. Point IS, Visionary things CAN happen, if we TRY to Do It! Almost all of the technology Exists Today, it's ONLY Man's will that is lacking to carry out the Alternative Energy Plan in this Article. And the Technology definitely WILL all be there, including Fusion Power, not mentioned in the article (That I saw so far) by 2050, or before.

Maybe bdhoro87's Beach Home will be Under Water by then, since he (or she) doesn't believe in technology or vision at all!

Steve
Asbury Park, NJ

www.facebook.com/AsburySteve32852

www.myspace.com/asburysteve

Realistically -- yes.

When it comes to forecasting the future, we are taught to follow the money. This is where the money is going -- into the very projects described in the road map.

As for the next fifty years, it's only once every fifty years that the government invests on the scale we are seeing in today's attempts at getting alternative energy. Added investment will be private and it will not be on this scale.

Is this "everything?" No but its "most everything" that represents large-scale engineering investment.

Thus I think it's a pretty good description of the future and the roadmap to getting there.

OK...all very nice but one type of energy is missing Magnetic dynamos. Do not let the government fool you with propaganda bull. A zero point energy magnetic dynamo can be made with simple tools ...magnets and copper wire a few minor parts and you can run your entire house on a unit of predetermined size, no power grid needed. Do not be a slave to govermental interference. Make your own Magnetic generator. The only reason we dont have them now is because the government would not have control of us thru the power grid...

http://www.aglik.com/vb/

I appreciate people who think, and so far, all the comments make good points. But there are problems with points when certain words are difficult to define and see such as the word "Market". To state that the "Market" will "Judge" the course of history is "True" but what is the "Market?" Most people "Place" themselves in that spot as if they are the market or that the U.S. is the market, people of wealth, those with money, etc... as if money decides. No. The "Market" is any and all "Needs" by any "One of US" and where there is a "Need" can then be seen as a "Void". There are many aspects of "Needs" in the "Market" of each individual or of the whole world market as a whole which can be talked about as general needs of humanity and every human as a part of that "Whole". The "Market" and the "Marketing" of "Energy" require more time and effort than everyone as separate with an individual opinion. The individual opinion is a great start as every effort must be included. But first those who believe themselves to be a group in the world that make a the "Market" must see the others in the world who too may have a contribution.

How many ideas have become reality from just a dream as the word "Imagination" takes those who wander outside of their reality of their moment in time in just the last 100 years? And there are still people without clean drinking water. So even when someone as I who have come to invent solutions for the energy problem can have little hope that the world would embrace the new ideas to share with those who cannot afford the plastic cup to put the water "Into" to "Drink" if the water were there and free. Still there would be someone as the "Modern Politician" to make a rule such as "No using your hands to drink, you must have a plastic cup".

I have designed "Systems" for the Wind, Fluid Mass in Motion, and other Energy solutions. Who can I "Tell" without looking to be Judged as a "Child" by everyone else as a "Parent". Society does not "Listen" to anyone unless that someone "Jumps" as high as "Society" requires.

I have a system for the Wind that collects 50 to 200 times more Energy than the "Wind Turbines" that I see being used. Imagine telling others 200 years ago that someone "Today" would be able to fly in something called a "Space Shuttle" at 18,000 miles per hour around the earth several times.

I am serious. The Department of Energy(Doe) would like me to "Just send pictures" and they have said "Don't you trust US"? I said "NO CHANCE". I have "Time" as the world "Works" to catch up. I am not in the "Market" for "Energy".

To all. Good Luck. To those who "Know about Luck":

"There is no such thing as LUCK".

Science can tell about how an idea works and why the idea does not break the "Laws" but ideas must be "Imagined". Where the one who "Imagines" can show some sense of reason with the "Laws" and tells others that there is more then requires "Faith" from others. I have no need to be "Tested". The time always comes around where people are "Banging" on the door to get "In". A Billion People bang on the door of the wealthy every day for help to get drinking water. There are already plenty of resources to have made that a reality for even a few of the "Billion" but that is not a priority.

I would help and give the ideas away for "Free" and the world "Market" would take them and then throw me out with the others who are not included in the "Priority" of the "World's Market".

Robonvac.

To bdhoro87 and to all of the "Realists". I am of course making the assumption that you are truly "Self Proclaimed Realists". But what does "Today's Reality" ever have to do with "Tomorrow's Reality". The "Human Needs" have never changed and never will change. Also everyone I know is a "Realist" to their own need, want, desire, etc...

The "Subject" is "Energy". Define the "Human Need" and I can tell you where "Humanity" will lead "Itself-ishness" as trying to make any attempt to communicate no matter how well intentioned will lead to comments from more "Intelligent Realists" such as asburysteve32852 who needs to "Imagine" others in harms way as if that will lead a "Horse to Water".

The "Subject" is "Energy". How much "Energy" is "Needed" will provide a reasonable road map even if individuals fail to reason. Yes, I see that "Realists" try to be as real as any human who is real. Just show me "One(1)" Human without "Real Need" and then I will know that there is a "Non- Realist". Maybe I am not a "Realist". And then maybe "Energy" is really not "Energy". As the custom has been made and said "Let's be Real" and keep to "Constructive Criticism" or in 50 years we will have passed where we are quickly headed "Now" and that is "Nowhere Fast" and to the screaming of social unrest as the "Needs" of humanity for "Energy" and all "Consumables" are now increasing faster to feed the "Fire" made by humanity for not providing basic needs to the growing general population.

The "Subject" is "Energy". But the subject should have been seen long ago as a "Human Management Problem". The "Competitive" ways of the "Market" are actually the "Priorities" of a few at the "Top" who decide what is "Popular" by Judgmental Self-Righteousness. I Love the Popular Science Magazine as a way to "Pass Time". I just see that so much "Potential" is wasted when the "Tools to Teach" are so available to such an avenue to teach people that all humanity "IS INCLUDED". If people would just be nice to consider their words before separating others from themselves then we could get on with truly informative comments. So when someone makes a "Comment" they could be nice enough to include something, yes anything of "Value" such as a simple definition of what is being said.

I know the world has a "Three Words or Less Expectation Span". But "Expectations" are the "Building Blocks" of the "Disappointment" the world is now "Going Into".

I can see into the future and next year will be more painful than this year. Anyone that can not see that is "Stuck" inside of a "Hole" and is avoiding the "Whole" of "Humanity" as the "Needs" can be seen to be growing "Exponentially".

Robonvac

I believe we should decentralize the power grid, at least for home use. If we build appliances that are more efficient, and we can produce better solar power cells for mass use, we can get off the grid.

http://www.flixya.com/post/suzyjenkins/1472483/

To suzyjenkins

WOW! Yes. I do know that you think "You Know" what you have just written.

"I believe we should decentralize the power grid".

The "Power Grid" is "In no way" the "Enemy".

"Decentralization" is a word that applies well to "Business Management" for dealing with problems of society "Specific" to different areas of the world market that when "Centralized" in one country impede the "Marketing" in other countries due to barriers such as different customs and language.

If "Everyone" was "Off the grid" then everyone would have to have the ability to produce their own electricity. That is a great thing, but then they would have to "STORE" their own electricity. That would mean "Chemicals, Plastics, Acids, Metals, Wires, etc..." AND the computerized system to control the whole thing to make the system as efficient and effective as possible before all of the batteries or storage containers ended up in the landfill. A farm or a house on a mountain would greatly benefit from "Decentralization" but could you imagine a "City" with "Bombs" everywhere? Batteries are in no way "Easy" to take care of by the "Mass of Users" who have a hard time remembering to put the cigarette out before going to bed. Would you really feel comfortable knowing that the next door neighbor has enough "Energy" to blow up your house at any time?

I am in no way trying to be mean or condescending as I have had to explain this to very well meaning friends who are more knowledgeable than I am.

"Homes" have a "Benefit" to be "Connected" to each other. Having a "Grid" would and does allow extra "Power" to be "Sold" back to the grid where another person can then use the power. If everyone had as you say "appliances that are more efficient, and we can produce better solar power cells"
this would be great and then the "Grid" would become an "Asset" to "ALL" of the "Power Companies" which would be the individuals with homes that have "Power Producing Capabilities" and that could be YOU! if you had the solar collection capability.

What I am "Assuming" you would like to get rid of is the "Power Companies" that now "Dominate" and "Charge" what they feel for something called electricity that is difficult to understand because it is difficult to "See and Contain".

There is so many benefits to a "Grid" just as "Roads and Highways". If I said that everyone could "Decentralize" and drive around their "Driveway" then what about those with only 20 feet of driveway or no "Driveway" at all?

There must also be taken into account all of the products that people purchase and take home which rely on the "Grid" such as the local supermarket and the production facilities such as warehouses etc... What would they do as they have plenty to do as "Work" and would then have more to do with batteries, lighting, A/C, refrigeration etc...

The subject is "Energy". And yes there should be a place where all of this information is readily available to everyone as now everyone would like to get off the "Grid". The "Grid" is in no way the "Problem". The "Grid" is "MINE!" and I do not "OWN IT". I do not have to pay to maintain it, and everywhere I go I get to "Plug IN and USE IT!" and that is quite and quietly reassuring. Just as the roads and highways that I "OWN" everywhere I go in my "Backyard"(U.S.A). I am very "Wealthy" and yet I "Have Nothing". Think about that just for a moment and try to see what I am saying. Then some day when the "Energy Systems" I have designed which cost less, much much less than the systems now being used, will have the possibility of delivering energy to others AT A LOWER COST than what an individual would be able to do on his own and without the need of "BECOMING" a "Power Company".

AND!!! the Grid is Yours!!! for and with the freedom to just plug in...

Robonvac.

Robonvac,
Don't be so condescending, Suzy's got a point. Also, I don't think you're using "quotation marks" "correctly".

Tesla and Edison had a big debate about whether electrical generation should be centralized in a few, large plants, or in many, small, local plants, like Suzy suggests. Edison won out, but only because economies of scale and availability of cheap coal made it more economical to have a few large plants and lots of AC lines. Decentralization is a slow process by which smaller generators are included in the system, while larger generators are reduced in size or phased out. The grid is still there, but the power production is less centralized. I think it's a good idea from a security standpoint, and allows us to get more of our energy from cleaner, but smaller generators like farms and rooftops.

To EParker:

I was in no way attempting to be condescending. All effort such as Suzy's is to be appreciated. You are right that how others see what one says must be taken into account. I am in no way attempting to score points either. But there are many things that you point to that have much value just as I was just trying to point in the same direction for any other one like "We" as we are all in the same "Boat" and yes I like quotation marks as they are helpful for pointing out rather than making points.

You say it well: "Tesla and Edison had a big debate". I see no need for debate. Economics runs the world rather than people trying to truly help people. Tesla was beyond "Genius" to the point that crazy would fit well. The size of a system is set by how many people can get together to make the system... My pointing out was more towards those who tell someone like Suzy that getting off the grid means having one's owned grid and that works well for a location that is too far to reach due to cost. Most people who want to get off the grid have a complaint about a company who provides power and that is a separate issue. Smaller generators added on to the grid is what I was also saying will happen as in the end the grid is not the problem. That would in no way decentralize the grid as the grid would remain as the center for the best use of electricity by all who use and supply.

I see that you are well informed as anyone who even thinks to use Tesla in an example must be well read. I know very little, but the little that I do know is that the grid is not a battery. Energy goes in and then it gets used or is lost through transmission etc...

The value of these conversations should be about what is learned even when someone like I do not posses the best communication skills. Sometimes a little friction helps remove fiction.

I appreciate your concern and will "Try", o'k, try. just remember to smile as I am just having fun as in no harm intended.

Robonvac.

Robonvac,
Every house in my city has gas powered water heaters, furnaces, and stoves. It happens every once in awhile, but not many houses "blow up". Natural gas can be just as explosive as the rest of the scenarios you claim. When someone smells gas, their heat doesn't work anymore, or their stove doesn't light up, they either fix it or get service on it.

If you were off the grid and something happened to your setup, more than likely the first thing that would happen is that you would lose power before something disastrous happened. This is not counting any safety backups/guards that may be built into the system to prevent this. When you lose power, YOU WILL be calling someone pretty quickly for repairs.

I even mentioned that we need make our appliances and other energy items more efficient? Maybe we could somehow run a refrigerator off energy as low as a few D cell batteries? That wouldn't require huge storage requirements.

Think outside the box a little bit.

http://blogs.ebay.com/suzyjenkins

I live outside of the box. If I were off the grid. I am off of the grid. I am not the one in need of energy as I collect my own. I was in no way attempting to stomp on your point. I was just pointing out how the grid needs to be seen for what it is and that is just a superhighway for electricity. Quite useful for those who can just plug in. Now when the grid does break down as there are blackouts then everyone should have a backup plan and there are many such as the various types of gas that are available. But just as lightning does strike so do gas systems have the chance to do damage but batteries are a real problem as they produce gas that can ignite with the spark they contain when some one is not careful. Car batteries have been known to blow up for no reason and one of my employees had that happen while checking the battery acid level. Batteries are not a joke. It seems amazing to me how many repair shops have acetylene gas cylinders and so few have accidents but when one does! wow what a show. Propane too has done its share of teaching people that an ounce of prevention...

When the world gets from maybe to a battery that runs a whole city block which I would in no way be against as I would buy one of those fantastic little batteries but the maybe is something I do not see.

I like to debate the impossible as I have prototypes of impossible energy collection systems. I like the grid. If it breaks some one will fix it and when I travel I can just plug in. Check and see if any one you know plugs in too.

You have the spirit. That is what is important to dreaming up the idea. And many times when some one says you can not do it well then maybe you can prove them wrong. I have faith in human creativity as I live in creativity and look for others who too teach me through their creativity.

Maybe I will get back in the box someday and share my ideas with others but for now I will just debate the idea.

Cheers.

Robonvac.

jerrydd

Robovac you are being rather boorish. Suzie was right as much or more than you are. Her points on eff are dead on like fridges should be well insulated and top loading would cut their energy needs by 75%. One can use 2 chest freezers, one for a fridge, the other for a freezer. Because of thinking like this my total energy bill is only $22-45/mo including cooking, hot water, heating, AC and my EV I drive every day. So conservation both works well and very low cost to do.

Your rant on batteries is just not as bad as you say. And for many like apartments or other sites that are not suitable for RE charging batteries cheaply at night to use during the expensive day can be very profitable.

The main reason I'd want to be on the grid is to sell power to them!!

Now back to future energy. I can build a 2kw wind generator that will last 50 yrs for around $400 in retail parts, Yahoo Axial Flux for more info.

I also do tidal/river generators for the last 30 yrs and they cost little and put out power at $.01-.02/kwhr.

Just priced out a 3kw solar thermal engine, a 5hp steam engine and a 200sq' trough collector that supplies about 10-25 kwhrs/day with 30-75kwhrs of heat. It's cost in parts is just around $3k.

So for under $5k or $12k if produced in mass production these could supply a lifetime of home, EV transport energy with enough left over to get a nice check from the utility. So for all you unbelievers or think RE is too costly, you are wrong, it's utility energy, fossil fuels that are too costly to continue.

Sadly my present home isn't suitable to these as I have 100% old oak canopy which helps a lot in Fla right now on AC costs.

For other future sources besides wind, solar, waste biomass can replace much of oil use as with RE for EV's and NG for semi's, oil needs will be very small.

River/tidal can replace much of coal though the idiots for some reason can't get theirs to work and the example shown won't work long either.

Nukes unless they can drop their price in 1/2 and keep fuel prices low, both very doubtful are too costly.

Wave energy won't even make .001% so not a factor. Just not enough resource nor are the generators eff.

NG will because it is plentiful, fairly low CO2, eff and clean will be about the only useful fossil fuel. By changing many coal plants to be power by NG turbines with the exhaust running the old boilers and a low temp Rankine replacing much of the condenser ups their eff to about 65-70% producing 1/10 the CO2 as coal for the same output.

And the biggest energy source of all as Suzie implied, eff/conservation will supply 30-50% of the energy we need by not needing it.

So these together can eliminate coal, oil without a decrease in living standards, in fact increase them by much lower energy bills and much cleaner air, water, land. Fact is no one mentions the increasing cost of oil, coal which are going up as RE costs are dropping makes RE by far the better future fuels.

You might notice even utilities know this as almost no new coal plants are being built and many converting to NG and last yr the most installed new power was wind generators.

To Jerrydd:

WOW! Very well said.

I completely see ONLY your point of view as well as smiling Suzy's. You point it out so well for me and your point remains rather POINTED as you point only to your self and forget about all of the other 330 million people in the U.S. and the 6 Billion in the world that could Use an infrastructure such as any Highway that the grid represents. Next we will all have to get out of having cell phones when we all like you have only one way to think and that is from our own bottom line. I could see every one with a ham radio again. Why did the idea of the personal ham radio fade? Why do people count on a telephone grid that services the cell phone? Wow, you have all the answers and I only have stupid questions.

Smiling Suzy can make any point she likes as long as it is along the lines of those like you who think only of their own self and everyone like you who wish and dream of getting off the grid as if that type of comment solves any problem for the population of any country. If any one tries to suggest anything else to her or to you so that the growing idea of getting off the grids of the world is seen from the many views rather than a few separate points well then just trust me that I clearly understand while I remain completely blind of course. I guess you and EParker have everything all thought out as if a debate between "Tesla and Edison" resulted in the course of where the grid is now. Tesla was completely self centered and self serving so he must have been as right as you.

Your bottom line, having just enough energy for you, making everything energy efficient for you and worrying about a few thousand watts as you suggest for everyone leaves out all of the others who need a grid as they also need whole systems such as an Internet that connects many into one whole. Oh yes you are so smart to pointedly point out how your only need is to sell a few dollars of energy back to the grid. CLEVER! How simple life would be if everyone could think in such large scale to include everyone rather than just in ME!

Me! Me! Me!... Mommy!

Now tell me from your brilliant point of view how to go from K-watts to M-watts to G-watts to the T-watts that are needed to keep everyone from eating each other through debate. Such as the energy easily found in the ocean and do so in an economical way for everyone. And keep up the great work of making the point as smiling Suzy and EParker that your point of view is the one that should set the course for everyone else. After we get off the grid then maybe we could get rid of Government too! WOW happy days are coming for everyone.

These comment pages are for any one with a point good or bad. Just a suggestion: Try not to be a Potato and so thin skinned. There are a billion people without clean drinking water and I hear your cry over theirs. Maybe everyone can get off of municipal water too! That could be next!

Goooood! Job guys and smiling Suzy! Well thought through.

jerrydd

Robovac, your post shows just what kind of person you are. I pointed out my experience as an example with the real numbers possible that others can follow and give a cost effective way either building them themselves as any handy person could or buy at reasonable prices.

And if it can be done cost effectively by the house, it can be done in larger scale.

But I guess you had to rant as you have been caught being so wrong. Hurts your ego doesn't it!

Facts are there is plenty of energy out there, we just need to catch it. And catching, storing isn't hard at all and many RE groups are online to help anyone who wants help building their own or buying stuff that works.

@jerrydd:

The subject is "The Future of Energy". Suzy wants to get off the grid. Who is stopping her as you point out well that there are groups to help her.

I could tell you how wrong you are in many comments that you have made. But you did not go as far as saying that everyone should get off the grid. You are welcome to your opinions as I have my opinions. What do they matter anyway as no one really cares. But to tell others about things like getting off the grid has nothing to do with anything. There is a science to energy off the grid and there is the science of the grid. What does that have to do with the future of energy? The rest of Suzy's comments were her opinion but when anyone starts telling others of a good idea then that idea should at least be realistic for those the idea is meant to include.

Good job recognizing just how boorish I am and what kind of person I am. I guess you did not read in my writings that I have designed large scale systems that are economical to the point where they could even be made for home use at some point in the near future. The problem I have is how to get them out and available in a way where I am not swept under the carpet. I can be as wrong as you would like to think but tell me where the grid has hurt the economy and what economy would there be without the grid? Also as you point out that things "Can be done in larger scale" what does that mean? without a grid that you would love to sell energy into.

Love to hate me, hate to love me. That has nothing to do with the grid and energy. Emotions mean nothing when as you point to the "Facts". The problem I saw was the collecting and storage so I came up with solutions that make the other systems that I see seem too costly. But hey I could just be crazy! So I made working models but everyone I talk to is so self consumed about their little projects. I do agree that every little project is useful so I am not bashing little projects as you assume that I was trying to bash others like Suzy. You just could not see that she was bashing a system that has been of great benefit to so many. But who cares anyway? I do not read Popcsi. to learn about how someone hates anything. To some people it's the grid, others hear the words global warming, to others it's climate change. It just gets old to hear of how some people are REALISTIC when in FACT everyone is REAL and realistic.

Now there is one point that you made of many that I disagree with and that is of energy efficiency. There is so much effort made to make appliances more energy efficient which is not a problem but the quality seems to put more stuff in landfills. How come cars are better made and yet they seem to end up in the scrap yard faster? Efficiency to me seems to be how quickly things can be discarded. I too see the abundance of energy and have found ways to collect the energy easier so that lights could remain on 24hrs. a day without burning anything and that would be possible if efforts were changed from things like efficiency to collection, storage, and distribution. But, you know me and what do I know? You are right. I could go on as the temptation calls to my ego so I must stop before I hurt myself further.

Robonvac.

Robanvac, jerrydd and suzyjenkins should get in a "box" and dream away! U guys have great knowledge and ideas. Ur vision can save the world. Never stop trying to overcome the obstacles. Many great people got to be great by persevering. Ur knowledge and efforts are appreciated.

EParker, actually it was Tesla that "won out" over Edision. Edison was pushing thousands of power plants using DC power. Tesla said far fewer plants using AC power.

Short of wide spread nuclear fusion, there will not be and can't be any significant change in our energy production. Solar has been around for 50+ years and has improved, but will never be what it needs to be to be a real player in large scale power production. Wind power is litterally a joke for the most part. There are a few locations that it works decent, but by far, most places it does not work well. The short term answer for abundent energy is clean coal and nuclear fission. Global warming theory should not be playing a role AT ALL in our efforts to move to more renewable energies, but right now it's THE driving factor that will lead to ruin and chaos.

I know how!
In the final about big oil problem...
...We have simple solution - "Perpetuum-Mobile"!!!
PM simple produce energy for long period of time, it's easy!
Humanity have knowledge to make free energy for everyone,
But Why, When & Who Will prevail monetary sistem to produce that???

Magnetic generators / dynamos are definitely a major player for a diverse range of energy applications. It is an incredibly smart technology. That is if it works, since i have not witnessed a generator in action. I am trying to build one in the hope that I could use it for small devices like flash lights, mini fans, etc.

Check out my blog http://transhumanist.blogspot.com for more on this and other future studies.