This topic would take volumes to explain, but the purpose of this thread is to separate some of the good ideas from the bologna and delve into the "why" of how we got to where we are.

One would think that after the 1973 gas crisis that the US would have a coherent energy policy with long term goals .... but nooooooo. Money and politics overrule common sense and have literally changed the world.

Is oil the best fuel for how the world is using it?
What should change and why.
What happened to nukes?
Why didn't solar take off even with a big shot of startup money?
What about natural gas?
What does the future bring?
Can a car run on coal?

The geopolitics of oil should give every sane person pause. The cheap oil used to be found in the United States but WWII and a lot of gas guzzling cars sucked the well dry. The rest of the "easy to get" oil is scattered around the world in mainly the middle East but large fields are also found in Venezuela, Nigeria, and a few odd locations resulting in unstable or radical countries controlling much of the oil market.

Unluckily, the World is experiencing a rising wave of radical extremists who are dealing out death across the world fueled by oil money. Without these clowns the outlook for different fuels would be much different as prices have been historically manipulated to the advantage of the Middle Eastern suppliers.

The rise and fall of nations has played a huge role also as the US is making the painful move to better gas mileage cars just as India and China start the process of creating a mobile middle class who all want automobiles just as science says "Putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is a bad idea!"

The need for energy goes up with the population and the increase in standard of living of the population.

Ironically, the same crowd who did everything possible to end the nuclear energy industry (and largely did!) are now the same ones who realize that nukes offer some of the cleanest and safest energy possible.

Some solutions are good, some are bad, and some are just crazy! What are yours?

Wow, a post I mostly agree with!

My take:

- any non-renewable should be off the table, or at best phased out as soon as feasible. And sadly, that includes nuclear, although it's a _much_ slower depleting resource.

- speaking of nuclear. I believe the next step in nuclear technology is betavoltaics, basically nuclear batteries. The russians have had them for decades (I believe though the US or UK developed them first) and they have used them in spacecraft... actually I think the Cassini uses one based on their design. Those are thermionic devices though I think.
Found some interesting articles though:
http://www.gizmag.com/water-nuclear-battery-radiolysis/33844/
http://www.gizmag.com/city-labs-nanotritium-betavoltaic-battery/23720/
Talk about betavoltaic batteries, one already commercially available, the other a prototype.

Found another article, of questionable reliability:
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/swedish-skeptics-confirm-nuclear-process-in-tiny-4-7-kw-reactor

But if it does prove true it seems a viable option for individual home power needs.

- why did solar initially fail? Cost, simply and purely. If it wasn't for large government subsidies, Chinese solar panels wouldn't get to the low cost they are today. But like everything else, hopefully the economies of scale will drive cost low enough to make it an attractive alternative. I think France is looking at replacing their nuclear reactors with solar. As in my solar topic, I myself found it cost effective to at least partially replace my energy needs to solar. The jury is still out on that one until I actually run the thing long term.

- Cars running on coal? Yeah, but why? Liquefied coal gas has been used at one time or another for over 100 years, but coal is still a non renewable resource. To me, anything that is a resource that other countries depend on, whether raw materials or energy (look at Russia/Ukraine/EU) becomes a political tool eventually. Look at the rare earths fiasco with China controlling output.

I like small wind, especially in certain geographical areas. I like that after my battery bank is full, I can divert the excess energy to heat my water. Especially in cloudy, cold Winter months.


As for transportation.
Electric is cool, but still has storage issues.

Hydroxy (Brown's Gas) looks interesting, more so since Stan Meyer's work has become sort of open sourced. There are many claims to a working solution, but that is still yet to be seen. Still worth keeping an eye on in the event of a wide spread success.

Then there is a group that is experimenting with hydrogen peroxide motors. Yep, same stuff that you use on cuts, and sent the space shuttles into orbit. It all depends on concentration of the H2O2. There is another guy in Mexico, who has H2O2 jet packs. Yes, you can fly. They even sell a distiller, to make your own fuel.

I'm waiting for my "Horace Greely" moment.

Oh yeah, the mexico guy! Read an article on him some time ago. Not sure I'd try one of those, and can't afford it anyways, but peroxide sounds interesting actually. Easier to store than pur hydrogen anyways.

Brown's gas, yeah, oxyhydrogen. My one worry is storage, since it contains weakly bonded hydrogen... and it couldn't be stored like modern hydrogen tanks, like in a hydride. So not sure how it improves over just plain hydrogen, they both have to be electrolyzed.

But yeah, batteries are the weakest link right now. Gasoline has a very high energy/volume ratio, even compared with other renewable fuels like highly compressed hydrogen. Even more so compared with even the most cutting edge batteries. So that technology has to really step up. But tbh, unless you're talking long distance trips, there are a good number of electric cars that do just fine for in town driving. And if they cut the charging time to say, 1/2 hour, long distance may even be a possibility. Shoot, I don't have a problem getting out of the car every 250 miles or so for a half hour break.

Residential, small business, rural, and remote renewable energy is my passion regardless of it's form. Here is a concept, and if you haven't seen it yet, I think you will find it leaning towards brilliance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duuk_r--lqU

Nice video. He kept referring to the machinery as cheap but it certainly didn't look that cheap. It did look like a viable option for areas far from the grid or like an island.

Nuclear energy is actually a renewable resource since breeder reactors produce more fuel than they consume.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6eyJ_VMdu8

For those who are really interested (most would find it long and boring) here is the history of what happened to the high efficiency, self regulating, self fueling, low operating cost thorium molten salt reactors developed at Oak Ridge Labs and killed by politics. India and China are now heading in that direction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knofNX7HCbg



And for anyone interested in the renewable energy aspects of this tech,

go here http://eswrenewableenergystudy.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/nuclear-technology-thorium-reactor/

And Thorium reactors cannot be used to make weapons.

hahah I know one darn thing if I would have started this countries energy... we would not have one darn nuclear facility in the USA...

just amazing to me how we let them ...be built as dangerous as they are with no shut off valve ... and some of the oil rigs... no immediate shut off ... no ...never going to change my mind about these kinds of energies ...