Last night on Kudlow and company there was a very good discussion on this subject. Here is the transcript of the interview of James Hackett CEO of Anadarko Petroleum which was done on the show.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25351487

 

Bob

 

OK - I watched it - no new - news there was there?

 

Why did we waste our time watching that.  Did you find it news worthy - really?

 

Kudlo is OK, but completely predictable.  You really do not even need to watch him more than a few times to know what he will say on any given topic.

If you don’t find it interesting fine, no sweat off my back.

It wasn't important what Kudlow was saying the guest was the one that I found interesting.

Well! I don't like the MSN butterfly! 

Ok we'll see if we can find you another one, ok.

Bob, all I was saying was the entire content was PUB fluff.  We need more oil so that we can use it up so that we will need more oil so that we can use it up.

 

Was this really anything different than a stupid anti Crack Comercial, except these guys wanted you to keep buying crack, so that they could sell you more.  You need to work more so that you can buy more to stay awake so that you can work more.

 

Until the world moves to other energy forms for heat and travel it is just going to be more addiction and the PUBs are our dealers aren't they.

I agree that we need to move to alternitive engery but in the mean time we are stuck with fossil fuels. I do think that unlike the 70s when as soon as there was enough oil for everyone we went right back to our old ways this time I hope we have learned the lesson, well at least I can hope.

Bob

Nuclear power plants are clean and less expensive to deliver, but they have an ugly side effect:  toxic wastes with 1,000 year life spans that must be stored in secure fascilities at tax payer expense.  If the total cost were considered, it wouldn't pencil out so well. 

 

 

INEEL is working on a solar film that has incredible potential but it needs to be safely harnessed before being made widely available.

 

Solar tiles and paint are available and street legal solar golf carts to get you around.  Consumers don't need the government to shift away from an oil based economy.  On the news the other night a women with a solar roof showed her electric bill drop from 300+ to $14 in the same month a year later.  She said that she saved $1,000 a year and the system would be paying for itself soon.  However, she said the system cost $50,000 ---fifty years is not soon.  The up front costs of solar have always been prohibitive.   If she installed in back in the 80's;  that tech works but is really cumbersome, maybe it is soon, for her.

 

 

 

IN....

 

I agree with letting private markets work their magic.  (surprise!)

 

PV's I don't believe will ever be able to power washer machines, ovens, ac, and other heavy users. That'll have to come from some other source.

 

PV is good for lights and most electronic devices. Although the output of inverters is now close to a sine wave, it isn't perfect. So things like turntables and other speed sensitive stuff gets messed up.

I guess I was wrong they do have true sine wave inverters.  doh!

 

Advantages of Pure Sine Wave inverters over modified sine wave inverters:

a) Output voltage wave form is pure sine wave with very low harmonic distortion and clean power like utility-supplied electricity.

b) Inductive loads like microwave ovens and motors run faster, quieter and cooler.

c) Reduces audible and electrical noise in fans, fluorescent lights, audio amplifiers, TV, Game consoles, Fax, and answering machines.

d) Prevents crashes in computers, weird print out, and glitches and noise in monitors.

e) Reliably powers the following devices that will normally not work with modified sine wave inverters:

• Laser printers, photocopiers, magneto-optical hard drives
• Certain laptop computers (you should check with your manufacturer)
• Some fluorescent lights with electronic ballasts
• Power tools employing "solid state" power or variable speed control
• Some battery chargers for cordless tools
• Some new furnaces and pellet stoves with microprocessor control
• Digital clocks with radios
• Sewing machines with speed/microprocessor control
• X-10 home automation system
• Medical equipment such as oxygen concentrators

We carry a full line of Pure Sine Wave Inverters here at DonRowe.com, though most of the inverters we carry are Modified Sine Wave inverters. Modified Sine Wave works well for most uses, and is the most common type of inverter on the market, as well as the most economical. Pure Sine Wave inverters (also called True Sine Wave) are more suited for sensitive electrical or electronic items such as laptop computers, stereos, laser printers, certain specialized applications such as medical equipment, a pellet stove with an internal computer, digital clocks, bread makers with multi-stage timers, and variable speed or rechargeable tools (see "Appliance Cautions" below). If you wish to use those items with an inverter, then choose a Pure Sine Wave inverter. If you mostly want to run lights, TV, microwave oven, tools, etc, a Modified Sine Wave inverter is fine for your needs.

 

Nuclear power plants are clean and less expensive to deliver, but they have an ugly side effect:  toxic wastes with 1,000 year life spans that must be stored in secure fascilities at tax payer expense.  If the total cost were considered, it wouldn't pencil out so well. 

 

 

Can we take these fuel rods that contain all this Plutonium, separate out the Plutonium and whatever Uranium was not used, and make more fuel rods? You bet. In fact, we actually end up with more fuel after the process than what we started with. Why is this not being done?

Can we do the same thing to produce nuclear fuel? The answer is a resounding Yes!

This type of reactor, called a Breeder Reactor, actually produces more fuel than it consumes. A reactor designed to use a mixed Plutonium fuel is basically the same as the Uranium reactor we have already discussed. However, the neutrons that sustain the reaction contain more energy - they are commonly known as "fast" neutrons.

In order to regulate the internal neutron flux, the primary coolant typically is one of the light metals like Sodium. Since Uranium-238 is one of the more abundant elements in the Earth's crust, Breeder Reactors make it possible to have an essentially unlimited source of fuel for nuclear reactors - which means an unlimited supply of electricity.

At its best, the Breeder Reactor system produces no nuclear waste whatever - literally everything eventually gets used. In the real world, there actually may be some residual material that could be considered waste, but its half-life - the period of time it takes for half the radioactivity to dissipate - is on the order of thirty to forty years. By contrast, the half-life for the stuff we presently consider nuclear waste is over 25,000 years!

Imagine a transformed energy landscape, where there is no nuclear waste problem, no power shortages, a safe and inexhaustible supply of inexpensive electricity. France has constructed and used Breeder Reactors like this for many years. So have the British and the Japanese. So why not the United States?

 

THE WHOLE ARTICLE IS WORTH READING REALLY...

Rugged individualism.

 

No matter the nuclear system setup, you are on a grid.  Grids are risky.  Consumers willing to pay more will force you to conservation programs like the grid system in California did to their customers.  Terrorists, looking to take out power in a region for its disruptive value. 

 

The new tech solar roofs can supply the household needs, maybe even the needs of your car, if it doesn't have a solar roof.  So why bother with nuclear plants and grid systems and all the risks that they represent for abusing customers, taking over territory.  

 

 

No dinosaurs in my future.  LOL 

 

 

DANN:  YOU WROTE:

<<<Why are we not utilizing Hydrogen to heat with, let alone drive with.  And if can charge our automobiles up with a little gas engine, why can't those same cars be used to electrify our homes when the power is out.>>>

Well Dann probably because to heat with Hydrogen would cost $1 dollar/kwa and coal is a little over 3 cents/kwa.

But forget that little problem, where are you going to get this Hydrogen you want to powere yoiur car and heat your home with?

<<<Plus there are many new ways to make energy that most people are unaware to date that need to be explored.>>>

Outside of fossil fuels there is only one viable source of energy, that is nuclear, if you use fast breeder liquid metal reactors, you not only clean up the hazardous radioactive waste we now have, you also get 20% more fuel out than is burned.

The only thing you can do with wind power would be to generate Hydrogen through electrolysis.

It’s simple not a reliable source of energy.

Photo voltaic is to expensive and only works in the day time.

KAHN