What can we do with $189 Billion?

[Jolly Roger]

I recently posted the following on a couple groups at Yahoo:

— In tomorrow-energy@yahoogroups.com, “mapeal3” wrote:
> What can we do with $189 Billion?

(China to invest $189 billion in alternate energy)

1. Immediately replace current light-water nuclear reactors with Thorium-fueled Molten Salt Reactors. (<$1 billion each) http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/

(a) Prototypes in 50s-70s proved it works, but it was dropped because it could not produce materials for nuclear weapons (now considered a good thing).

(b) The design is inherently safe (no Chernobyl’s).

(c) The waste decays to safe levels in 50 years, to background in 500 (instead of 10,000).

(d) Thorium ore is much more plentiful than Uranium, and the US has 3,000 tons of refined Thorium, enough to power entire US for 2 years.

2. Fund research into aneutronic fusion. The most promising is Focus Fusion.

https://focusfusion.org

(a) The very high temperatures required for aneutronic Proton-Boron fusion have already been demonstrated.

(b) The fuel is not radioactive, unlike Tritium, the fuel for the Tokomak. Also, Tritium has to be created in a fission reactor.

(c) As neutrons are not used or created in the main reaction, very little radioactive waste is created.

(d) Focus Fusion is cheaper. It produces electricity directly, requiring only a transformer to make it usable. The Tokomak, on the other hand, produces heat, just as fission reactors do, and requires the machinery-intensive steam cycle to produce electricity. Also, the Focus Fusion reactor is much smaller and less complicated. (<$300,000 each) (e) No materials for nuclear bombs are created. (f) Properly funded (< $10 million), Focus Fusion could be producing electricity in less than 10 years. The Tokomak is still 50 years (and $3 billion) away. ========================= Please note that I only consider Thorium a stop-gap measure until Focus Fusion is up and running.

[Elling]

Kirk Sorensen at thoriumenergy.blogspot.com and his Oak Ridge groupies may be a little bit nostalgic, not that there’s anything wrong with that…
But the original MSR design didn’t foresee the replacement of the grahite moderators.
These “tar babies” dripping with radioactive salts…

However the French, the Russians and the Japanese seem to think that MSRs can be run on fast neutrons instead of thermal without graphite moderators.
MSR remains an excellent design but it takes experts and tens of millions at least to build them. There are proposals for small scale MSRs but it seems that radioactive handling still should be strictly regulated among the smallest number of players possible. This means big scale reactors.
GW reactors means big corp and Wall Street finance with your fair share of inertia and ripoff.

Beat this :
http://home.earthlink.net/~bhoglund/multiMissionMSR.html

[Rematog]

Just a minute….

At the most optimistic, (20MW power blocks with installed cost of $500k ea), repowering America’s electrical generating capacity will cost about 30 BILLION dollars.

Of course big business and Wall Street will be involved. This could not be achieved in any other realistic way in the USA as it is today. And, the electrical distribution infrastructure will need to be maintained and even improved (cheap power means more demand for power).

Note, I said distribution, not transmission. Even if the Fusion Power Blocks are distributed throughout the system, power will still have to get from the local substation to your home or business. This isn’t “Mr. Fusion” from “Back to the Future”, you wouldn’t be installing one in your basement…. unless your Bill Gates rich and have a house using Megawatts of power….lol

Rematog

Transmission = high voltage (generally > 60Kv) lines carrying large amounts of power cross country from the power plant to the distribution substation.
Distribution = Med. Voltage (13Kv and less) taking power from the substation to the customer.

(yes, I think of 480V three phase power as low voltage….)

[Brian H]

Rematog wrote: Just a minute….

At the most optimistic, (20MW power blocks with installed cost of $500k ea), repowering America’s electrical generating capacity will cost about 30 BILLION dollars.

Of course big business and Wall Street will be involved. This could not be achieved in any other realistic way the the USA as it is today. And, the electrical distribution infrastructure will need to be maintained and even improved (cheap power means more demand for power).

Note, I said distribution, not transmission. Even if the Fusion Power Blocks are distributed throughout the system, power will still have to get from the local substation to your home or business. This isn’t “Mr. Fusion” from “Back to the Future”, you wouldn’t be installing one in your basement…. unless your Bill Gates rich and have a house using Megawatts of power….lol

Rematog

Transmission = high voltage (generally > 60Kv) lines carrying large amounts of power cross country from the power plant to the distribution substation.
Distribution = Med. Voltage (13Kv and less) taking power from the substation to the customer.

(yes, I think of 480V three phase power as low voltage….)

Yes, lots of local upgrading. Probably there’s a place for charging depots for fast-charging for a fee, too, possibly adjoining the generator sites themselves. That might ease some of the requirements.

[Rematog]

Brian,

Fast Charging site. First, this implies a capacitor type electric car. No current battery charges at a rate I’d call “fast”.

Second, the likely high voltage would be 480V, 3 phase. The danger of electrocution at higher voltages just seems too great. (Have you ever seen the care with which 6,900V power is connected to a motor? I have, it is impressive).

For a vehicle to be charged with the energy of 40 Hp x 4 hours operation @ 90% efficiency

40 hp x 4 hr x .746 kw/hp = 119.4 Kw-hr

119.4/0.90 Eff = 133 Kw-hr

Therefore the amperage for a 480V, 3 phase feed would be: (V*A=W)

3^0.5 x 480V x A = 133,000 Watts (for one hour charge) [square root of 3 (3^0.5) is factor for 3 phase AC power]

A= 160 Amps

Therefore, to charge in 5 min. = 60/5 x .16 = 1,920 Amp (big wires, eh)

The next common industrial voltage, 4160V, 3 phase, is a bit dangerous for the general public (no self service), but possible with care and good engineering (but don’t knick the insulation on the cables…)

3^0.5 x 4160V x A = 133,000 Watts, A= 18.5 amps

So, to charge in 5 min. = 222 amps.

So when you talk about fast charging an electric car, consider plugging in a 4 thousand volt, 200 amp cable, and reaching for the “on” switch….

Rematog

[Brian H]

Rematog wrote: Brian,

Fast Charging site. First, this implies a capacitor type electric car. No current battery charges at a rate I’d call “fast”.

Second, the likely high voltage would be 480V, 3 phase. The danger of electrocution at higher voltages just seems too great. (Have you ever seen the care with which 6,900V power is connected to a motor? I have, it is impressive).

For a vehicle to be charged with the energy of 40 Hp x 4 hours operation @ 90% efficiency

40 hp x 4 hr x .746 kw/hp = 119.4 Kw-hr

119.4/0.90 Eff = 133 Kw-hr

Therefore the amperage for a 480V, 3 phase feed would be: (V*A=W)

3^0.5 x 480V x A = 133,000 Watts (for one hour charge) [square root of 3 (3^0.5) is factor for 3 phase AC power]

A= 160 Amps

Therefore, to charge in 5 min. = 60/5 x .16 = 1,920 Amp (big wires, eh)

The next common industrial voltage, 4160V, 3 phase, is a bit dangerous for the general public (no self service), but possible with care and good engineering (but don’t knick the insulation on the cables…)

3^0.5 x 4160V x A = 133,000 Watts, A= 18.5 amps

So, to charge in 5 min. = 222 amps.

So when you talk about fast charging an electric car, consider plugging in a 4 thousand volt, 200 amp cable, and reaching for the “on” switch….

Rematog

Yep, self-service would work only with a goof-proof safety interlock, but I think the one currently in place is pretty good, from what I’ve read. And “fast” is relative to 3.5 hr/50+ kwh. Thinking of typical usage, for someone doing 50 mi/day stopping by every 3 days for a top-up might make sense, if home connections were unsuitable (apt. dwellers, older buildings, etc., etc.). Or for “emergency” use away from the “Home Socket”.

[Lerner]

First of all, self-service is not such a great idea when you are pumping gasoline either, so let’s assume you have service people connecting your car.

But Rematog is right that the technical problems are non-trivial. You have to get the current to the car without losing hardly anything to resistance or everything melts. You have to worry about inductance slowing you down. You have to have very efficient transformers to step the voltage down because the capacitor is not going to be charging very high. The you have to worry about distributing a whole lot of current in the capacitor itself.

These are not easy problems, but not necessarily insoluble. And, hey, if it takes 15 minutes to charge your car instead of 5, will it really matter?

In addition, let’s not lose track of the fact that we have to get a lot of cars off the road anyway with mass transit. Right now, with existing technology the US could have as much mass transit as West Europe but does not for political reasons and the power of the oil/auto interests, both now and historically.

Personally, I’ve always liked the idea that, I think, RAND came up with in the ’70’s of running maglev trains in evacuated tunnels. Energy consumption is very low, since you get it back in electromagnetic breaking, but speeds are only limited by how fast acceleration is comfortable for the passengers. I once figured you could get NY to DC with a stop or two in 20 minutes and NY-LA in under an hour, non-stop. Big tunnels, but do-able.

[Brian H]

Lerner wrote: First of all, self-service is not such a great idea when you are pumping gasoline either, so let’s assume you have service people connecting your car.

But Rematog is right that the technical problems are non-trivial. You have to get the current to the car without losing hardly anything to resistance or everything melts. You have to worry about inductance slowing you down. You have to have very efficient transformers to step the voltage down because the capacitor is not going to be charging very high. The you have to worry about distributing a whole lot of current in the capacitor itself.

These are not easy problems, but not necessarily insoluble. And, hey, if it takes 15 minutes to charge your car instead of 5, will it really matter?

In addition, let’s not lose track of the fact that we have to get a lot of cars off the road anyway with mass transit. Right now, with existing technology the US could have as much mass transit as West Europe but does not for political reasons and the power of the oil/auto interests, both now and historically.

Personally, I’ve always liked the idea that, I think, RAND came up with in the ’70’s of running maglev trains in evacuated tunnels. Energy consumption is very low, since you get it back in electromagnetic breaking, but speeds are only limited by how fast acceleration is comfortable for the passengers. I once figured you could get NY to DC with a stop or two in 20 minutes and NY-LA in under an hour, non-stop. Big tunnels, but do-able.

I left out the crucial info that I was thinking of the Tesla Roadster’s capabilities. [ teslamotors.com ]

The analogy with W. Eu. is undermined by the order of magnitude (at least) difference in population density and commute distances, etc. But there will be lots of impacts on personal/public transportation when FF and EVs get together, not least of which might be an explosion of road usage, requiring massive upgrading, far from “getting vehicles off the road”. And electric trains of all sorts, rail and maglev both, will become much easier to budget. Exotic possibilities like broadcast/induction power vehicles would be affordable, despite inefficiencies and lossiness.

Even air travel costs will plummet as fuel prices collapse.

The bind moggles!

[Rematog]

Eric,

“Have to get cars off the road…”

WHY??? I like my car and my freedom to travel where I wish. Given limited supplies of petroleum and air pollution effects, I understand need to get internal combustion engines off the road. But this does not imply cars.

The statement about “needing” to get rid of cars…well lets just say I strongly disagree with the world view that implies.

REMATOG

[Lerner]

Try getting into New York City by car during rush hour to get a good idea of the need to reduce traffic. Commuting by car does not provide any freedom at all Cars are good for pleasure trips, but mass transit is a lot bettter for getting people to and from work.

[Brian H]

Lerner wrote: Try getting into New York City by car during rush hour to get a good idea of the need to reduce traffic. Commuting by car does not provide any freedom at all Cars are good for pleasure trips, but mass transit is a lot bettter for getting people to and from work.

I use mass transit to and from work, and it sucks. Busses and rail/subways are hot or cold, timing is often very hard to manage, especially for odd shifts, it’s often crowded and uncomfortable, and if you’re not living on or near main routes, stops can be quite far from where you are.

But it’s cheaper to use.

People who use cars pay through the nose for gas and parking, etc., but can go, despite traffic, in 15 minutes where it takes me 45 minutes to reach — much of it standing around exposed to the weather.

[Rematog]

Mass transit can be used, and useful, only where large numbers of people travel, in predictable directions and times.

Only during the early 80’s have I worked where this was remotely possible. And then, the local bus system was a joke.

Where traffic, etc. makes it useful, such as New York, Washington, etc, real mass transit systems (trains/subways) are good. But most American cities have only an underfunded bus system. The city I live in (a state capital, but relatively small in size) has a bus system that was recently criticized in the local paper as taking 1 to 1.5 hours to cross town. This is a trip requiring about 15-20 minutes by car, 30 minutes at the worst of traffic conditions. If you can get where your going at all, and still may have to walk 1/2 a mile or more to a bus stop, possibly in the rain, etc. (in summer, it rains many afternoons around 3-4 pm).

I’ve worked outside of town most of my life (power plants are the post child of NIMBY). If I can’t drive to work…I’d have to walk, or bicycle, 35 miles, each way. And on country roads, with no shoulders, a bicycle would be a death sentence, especially at 6:30 in the morning, in winter, when it’s dark, possibly foggy… you get my point.

So yes, I get my dander up when someone seems to imply that I should give up my car. You’ll take the steering wheel from my cold dead fingers….(or, maybe, I should be buried in my car, nah…it’s been done).

[Lerner]

Wow, touched a nerve here. I said get a lot of cars off the road, meaning reduce car usage, not get rid of cars. This can only be done by greatly expanding mass transit making it fast and easy to use. Of course very low density regions can not be completely covered by mass transit, but where most people live, easy acess to mass transit can be made available with existing technology.

[jamesr]

Living in London I have had no need of a car at all. The underground and bus network is fine for most purposes, and when I need to travel somewhere not close to a station or late at night taxis are fine. Then on the weekends I can travel out of town to visit people by train or occasionally hire a car.

Mass transit can work but it needs to take priority over private cars. The growth in dedicated bus lanes and smart card ticketing systems has sped up bus travel in London so it is now faster than cars.

The trouble I see with most cities (especially in the US) is that due to cheap gas prices and available land they have grown so the suburban sprawl means the average commuter distance is tens of miles, rather than the few miles people used to walk or cycle to work in the past. This structure of city planning & suburban living cannot be got rid of quickly. It needs a complete change in city design and peoples expectations of wanting there own plot of land.

I am all for improving mass transit systems and encouraging people to live close to work/school etc. Having said all that though I am about to be moving out of London, so am finding that I can’t go without having a car as the rest of the UK doesn’t have adequate public transport in place.

James

[Rematog]

James,

I’ve had the please to travel to Britain twice in my life, and greatly enjoyed it and the wonderful underground system in London.

But, as I posted, this type of system only exists in the great metropolises. It may be possible to reduce car usage, and I’m sure that practical electric vehicles are possible in the near term.

But one thing I’ve noticed is that Europeans are, for the most part, lacking a “gut feel” for the size of the United States, esp. the western half. They can understand it when they look up a distance and make calculations, but their “feel” for the world is just smaller then the reality of the western US.

One small example, I was working at a food packaging plant in Iowa with a couple of vendor’s engineers from Italy. When we were about to have our Memorial Day holiday, which gives Monday off, making a three day weekend, they asked my about the Grand Canyon in Arizona, and begun to make plans to drive there. They asked my if they could get there after work in an evening’s drive…..I pointed out, that it is about 2,000 kilometers from Des Moines, Iowa to the Grand Canyon. They were thunderstruck.

What this means is that the type of public transportation systems the work in Europe, and the American Northeast, are not so practical in the Mid-west and western US. Yes, our cities were designed for the car. They grew up with it. It would take, I believe, more then one generation to change that. And what is the driving reason to make that change?

Some light rail for larger cities heavy traffic corridors makes sense. Add practical electric vehicles for commuting and alternate fuel (name one) vehicles for long range use. Remember, for a family living on a ranch in Montana, a trip to the city for grocery’s and sundries is a long range trip (often over 100 km each way).

Rematog

[Author]

Posts