I don't think anyone should nitpick a potential new solution, though we don't have the bandwidth in this organization to do the required tech assessment.
My nitpick is with the idea that any one solution will take us all the way to where we need to be on energy and climate.
New research requires nitpick. Nitpick eliminates delusion. I have performed more nitpick then you could imagine. However if you make decisions on a flash of nitpick the real work is lost! So, are you fixed in your opinion there is nothing brand new no one has ever heard of? Does the accelerated mass losses in hydro power seem unreasonable? I am telling telling you about something I have studied for over 50 years, but you can not imagine a real 85% inefficient common design is not a problem? If someone with a real solution can not even get the attention of someone like you then all is lost and will forever remain lost!. I have the answers, but if you write this off too quickly ...
Mitchell, until we can find a renewable energy design that eliminates the need for fossil fuels by 100%, there will be this kind of trash on the tracks. The old saying, "Follow the money" stands true.
Hydro power could easily do this if we would just abandon the hydro turbine designs. These systems waste over 85% of the energy available in the form of accelerated mass. I can show you a whole new way to generate electricity with elevated water that will recover a majority of the energy available.
I do not have the contacts to bring these points forward, but you do.
Thanks, Tim. I'm going to nitpick with the idea that any single renewable energy source can be a 100% replacement for fossil fuels.
We need the full toolbox of efficiency and supply options for delivering the services and amenities that energy provides, and one of the most exciting aspects of the shift off carbon is that so many of those options are practical, affordable, and ready for prime time. It doesn't help matters one bit when the fossil industry pollutes an urgent and necessary conversation, just as they've polluted the landscape and the atmosphere, with fake "solutions" like CCS that conveniently prop up their continued dominance, inconveniently don't really work so well, and outrageously depend on outlandish taxpayer subsidies. Hydropower in any form is one part of that picture, though it increasingly seems to be held back by high project costs (for large hydro, at any rate) and uncertainties about future dam integrity (in a climate-driven deluge) and water supply (in a multi-year megadrought).
I don't think anyone should nitpick a potential new solution, though we don't have the bandwidth in this organization to do the required tech assessment.
My nitpick is with the idea that any one solution will take us all the way to where we need to be on energy and climate.
New research requires nitpick. Nitpick eliminates delusion. I have performed more nitpick then you could imagine. However if you make decisions on a flash of nitpick the real work is lost! So, are you fixed in your opinion there is nothing brand new no one has ever heard of? Does the accelerated mass losses in hydro power seem unreasonable? I am telling telling you about something I have studied for over 50 years, but you can not imagine a real 85% inefficient common design is not a problem? If someone with a real solution can not even get the attention of someone like you then all is lost and will forever remain lost!. I have the answers, but if you write this off too quickly ...
Mitchell, until we can find a renewable energy design that eliminates the need for fossil fuels by 100%, there will be this kind of trash on the tracks. The old saying, "Follow the money" stands true.
Hydro power could easily do this if we would just abandon the hydro turbine designs. These systems waste over 85% of the energy available in the form of accelerated mass. I can show you a whole new way to generate electricity with elevated water that will recover a majority of the energy available.
I do not have the contacts to bring these points forward, but you do.
dragmit@protonmail.com
Thanks, Tim. I'm going to nitpick with the idea that any single renewable energy source can be a 100% replacement for fossil fuels.
We need the full toolbox of efficiency and supply options for delivering the services and amenities that energy provides, and one of the most exciting aspects of the shift off carbon is that so many of those options are practical, affordable, and ready for prime time. It doesn't help matters one bit when the fossil industry pollutes an urgent and necessary conversation, just as they've polluted the landscape and the atmosphere, with fake "solutions" like CCS that conveniently prop up their continued dominance, inconveniently don't really work so well, and outrageously depend on outlandish taxpayer subsidies. Hydropower in any form is one part of that picture, though it increasingly seems to be held back by high project costs (for large hydro, at any rate) and uncertainties about future dam integrity (in a climate-driven deluge) and water supply (in a multi-year megadrought).