Power Outage:What was the 1st U thought Off?

[Questor]

Environmentalists have unrealistic expectations. First, we dont have the constant winds to make wind power economical on a large scale, secondly, solar power as nice as it sounds is not feasible in our winter climate. Thus we have to fall back on nuclear, coal and gas generating unless we can find better ways to harness our water power without impacting the environment in a negative way.

And what unrealistic expectations would those be? That we change the structure an economy that loots and plunders the earth's resources and condemns the majority of the earth's inhabitants to exteme poverty so that small corporate elite can live in extreme opulence? As has already been stated by myself and others, conservation is a large part of the answer. Investment in alternative renewable energy is also part of the equation. We now have a wind mill on Toronto lakeshore that generates enough electricity to power 250 homes. And if you care about the environment, you can invest in a second wind mill that is going to go up in Ashbridges Bay. For $500, you can join the Windshares Cooperative and receive a fair return on your investment while contributing to green energy. That seems feasible enough to me, even if is not the whole answer by itself. The only reason the dirty sources of power seem so feasible is because environmental costs are not considered. What is the cost of 1000 premature deaths annually due to air pollution in Ontario?

Perhaps the one thing we can agree on is that we have a few idiots running the country. And it seems to me they are all white guys who get elected with the money of all their white friends. So if we are going to bring race into it, I guess we could start right there.

 

[Questor]

Questor, you are reading between the lines. Number one, you cannot sustain extended population growth without having the resources to sustain it. Are you aware that in the GTA last year over 40,000 new homes were sold? Have we built up the infrastructure of our area to compensate for that population growth?

Sheik, I agree that we cannot sustain extended population growth and that growth of infrastructure is required. Race comes into it when you blame immigrants for the shortsightedness of government. Immigrants to this country are, afterall, 90% non-white.

Originally posted by Sheik As for windmills, they only generate power when the wind is blowing. There are currently two in the GTA, one in pickering and one at ontario place. Same thing with solar power, they only generate power when the sun is shining. Due to the latitude we are on, only in the summer months do we exceed 12 hours of sun per day. The rest of the year is considerably less than 12 hours.

Electricity from wind and solar power can be stored in batteries for use when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. And Toronto has on average 12 hours of daylight per day, the same as any other location on the planet. However, I agree that solar power cannot be generated here with the same success as locations such as deserts where there is very little cloud cover and hence lots more sunshine. But active and passive solar systems can be used here in Canada and represent part of the solution.

Originally posted by Sheik Hydroelectric dams do a great job, unfortunately we have to block rivers and build lakes to power them. The impact on communities around those rivers would be astronomical.

Hey, maybe we can agree afterall on more than the fact that we have idiot politicians.

Originally posted by Sheik I've done my part, I've slashed production and electrical usage in my businesses. I'm going to miss deadlines that could potentially cripple my business but I'm doing it so everyone else can keep their tv's on and refridgerators running. What are you doing? Screaming about racism? [/B]

In all seriousness, I congratulate you on what you have done as stated above. But I have no desire to get into a pissing match with you by naming all the things I have done to help the environment. I try to live my life according to my values. I am happy that I have managed to do that to the extent that I have, although I acknowledge that there is still room for improvement.

In defense of a statement made by you in another thread, I did not call you a racist. I believe I said your statement was bordering on racist. I can clearly distinguish the difference between your opinions and those of some others who have been aggressively promoting hate. And I hardly think I was screaming about racism. If your problem is with lack of infrastructure, not to mention urban sprawl and government policy, we can agree on another point. If you are going to blame environmentalists and immigrants for our power shortage, that just doesn't add up, as I think I have shown over the course of this discussion.

Cheers,

Questor

 

[Goober Mcfly]

... infrastructure ...

Better.

 

[wrong hole]

The root of the problem is we have more demand than we have supply and its time to stop the demand or increase the supply.

....you have to stop using so many god damn vibrators then....

 

[Questor]

The root of the problem is we have more demand than we have supply and its time to stop the demand or increase the supply.

LOL well, I am glad we have delisted immigrants as the cause of blackout. See, when we work on it, we really can see eye to eye.

No, I am blaming the environmentalists for slowing things down so much that the infrastructure cannot handle the demands. The politicians get blamed for everything else from overspending to underspending on certain things.[/B]

Now, since I seem to have misunderstood your opinion about immigrants, maybe I should ask you to clarify your position on environmentalists. Exactly what have they done in terms of slowing things down? Because the aforementioned wind mill on the lakeshore was organized and built by those very people. And they are certainly at the forefront of the conservation movment. Surely you have to see that conservation is the key here. By reducing demand, community needs are brought into line with existing infrastructure and thereby saving us all from more taxes. I am sure you agree with this because you already stated that extended population growth and hence economic growth cannot be sustained. You seem to be advocating a conservation position here but at the same time resisting it. And you state above that we must stop demand or increase supply. It seems to me the best way to stop demand is through conservation. So are we really on the same page here Sheik, after all this misunderstanding? 'Cause it seems to me we are back to those idiot politicians...they are the ones holding up development of cleaner alternative energy and conservation efforts, not the environmentalists.

 

[Lady Sarah]

All I thought was holy shit!...I better hurry up and eat all my dairy.

 

[Morgan Ellis]

All I thought was holy shit!...I better hurry up and eat all my dairy.

Haha! I wish I'd been *home* to eat mine - better that than coming back and having to clean it up...

Morgan

 

[Diode]

OK, take heed:

Power, unlike water, food or sexual tension, can not be saved, stored or held in a convienient way.

Yes, batteries offer a certain ability to transfer chemical energy into the motion of electrons.

However, battery technology, while impressive, can not even approach the demand required by the average household today.

When people think of power requirements, for some reason they think of the demand added to the grid from their PCs, scanners ect.

Remember friends, that the draw from one stove (up to 5kW) is perhaps the equivalent to 10-15 PCs.

Air Conditioners, Refrigerators, water heaters are the HIGH demanders of power in the home.

However, household requirements are minimal compared to the manufactuing industrys of Ontario( That employ MANY THOUSANDSOF US!)

Solar, Wind and other 'renewable' energy sources have promise, in the future, BUT, to continue our province must have deliverable power for the next 50 years!

Nukes, Hydro, Thermal, whatever---We need power!

Don't fall for the fairy story from the rest--Research!

And remember Ohms Law:

P= IV

Where
P=Power( in Watts)
I=Current(in Ampers (amps))
V=Voltage(in Volts)

A simple equaion, but undeniably true!

Your simple electical technologist

 

[Wired For Sound]

Now, since I seem to have misunderstood your opinion about immigrants, maybe I should ask you to clarify your position on environmentalists. Exactly what have they done in terms of slowing things down? Because the aforementioned wind mill on the lakeshore was organized and built by those very people. And they are certainly at the forefront of the conservation movment. Surely you have to see that conservation is the key here. By reducing demand, community needs are brought into line with existing infrastructure and thereby saving us all from more taxes. I am sure you agree with this because you already stated that extended population growth and hence economic growth cannot be sustained. You seem to be advocating a conservation position here but at the same time resisting it. And you state above that we must stop demand or increase supply. It seems to me the best way to stop demand is through conservation. So are we really on the same page here Sheik, after all this misunderstanding? 'Cause it seems to me we are back to those idiot politicians...they are the ones holding up development of cleaner alternative energy and conservation efforts, not the environmentalists.

So many economic fallacies. Let me deal with a few:

1) It's the 4.3 cent price cap that gives an economic incentive to "waste" electricity. The price cap must be lifted. This will give an incentive (IN THE SHORT TERM) to conserve. But, once this price cap is lifted there will be an incentive to increase power generation by competitors that must receive no barrier to entry. Let the consumers choose their own supplier amoung different kinds of energy sources. Once this takes place, prices will fall and increased consumption will take place -- deep down we all want the convenience of electricity use. Conservation is NOT an end in itself. There's really no reason to conserve because we aren't running out of natural resources. I'm serious, we really aren't.

2) Population Growth and Economic Growth can't be sustained: False! LoL, oh so false! The opposite is true: Popuation growth, when markets are allowed to function, sustains Economic growth. E.g. Look at the decreasing infant mortality rates, increased life expectancy, rising standard of living in 19th century Great Britian. Look atthe sustained economic growth alone with population of 19th century America.

Here's an example on Population Statistics on some U.S. States

State Years 1810 1820 1830

Ohio 230,760 581,434 937,903
Indiana 24,520 147,178 343,031
Louisiana 76,556 153,407 215,739
Tennessee 261,727 422,823 681,904
(taken from Paul Johnson's: The Birth of the Modern: World Society 1815-1830)

Moreover, take a look at the cost of food production, and the amount of food production. We're producing more food on far less land then ever before. If your, premise was correct, Questor, we'd have more expensive food -- but that's not the case.

Same can be said about natural resources over time. The prices are coming down, they're not going up. In fact, the more of us that use natural resources, the cheaper they'll be.( We have, just in normal reserves alone, enough Oil to last us for several hundred years.). Think about it -- and look at the evidence. Pick a resource in demand and track it's price over the last several hundred years. Look, I'll give you a lead: look up author Julian Simon on this.

But remember: Markets must be respected. In short, such things as Liberal democratic values (rule of law) and property rights must be respected. I can explain this for you, Questor (and Sheik?) , if you wish.

 

[bar+leby88]

My very first thought wasn't about terrorism........although I eventually thought that as the blackout took longer and longer to be resolved.......

i just thought too many people were using their air conditioners so they cut the power....it was a hot day

 

[sweetdaddyc]

I believe the Bin Laden and the POPE conspired and

are to blame for this outage
They caused all this to happen with their prayers and ranting
Poof out goes the power
Damn Fanatics

cheers
SDC

 

[bar+leby88]

Conspiracy Theory

anyone want to entertain the possibility of a government conspiracy to test the scenario in which major cities in the Northeast had no power......they want to see how we react

 

[Wired For Sound]

Sheik, you make some good points, however, you still share some of the Environmentalists fallacious premises. "Renewable" vs "Nonrenewable" is a false distinction. We've a Government caused problem, there should be no reason to conserve energy.

 

[Liminal]

I looked at the article Shiek

And it clearly states that at least 6,000 tons of radioactive material will be created. The entire fusion machine will become radioactive according to the head of the group proposing the project. This is hardly scare-mongering by environmental groups.

Further, the federal government's Natural Resources department says: "significant government spending and risk" with likely cost overruns, and that "even a technical success will not guarantee fusion to be commercially viable."

I'm trying to understand why you've singled out the various environmental groups?

 

[papasmerf]

it is simple
a unit went down and since they use JIT thinking in ENERGY plants, just like the rest of the world does. There is little or no PM on these units (in most cases).

A major piece of equiptment failed and sent signal out to shut down. The NUKES down the line complied as the systems were designed to.

Where was it?????
Why does that matter?

 

[Questor]

So many economic fallacies. Let me deal with a few:

1) It's the 4.3 cent price cap that gives an economic incentive to "waste" electricity. The price cap must be lifted. This will give an incentive (IN THE SHORT TERM) to conserve. But, once this price cap is lifted there will be an incentive to increase power generation by competitors that must receive no barrier to entry. Let the consumers choose their own supplier amoung different kinds of energy sources. Once this takes place, prices will fall and increased consumption will take place -- deep down we all want the convenience of electricity use. Conservation is NOT an end in itself. There's really no reason to conserve because we aren't running out of natural resources. I'm serious, we really aren't.

My apologies to those that gave this thread a decent burial a few days ago. I had to go all the way to page 4 to resurrect it. I could not respond earlier as I have been away protesting and hugging trees. LOL

Well Wired, I can go along with your reasoning in terms of lifting the cap, but after that, you lose me. By subsidizing electricity, the government is both ensuring wasteful use of electricity and trying to buying our votes in the next election. But hopefully the public will see through the scam. Power transmission and generation needs to be in public hands, as it has been since the early part of this century. It is only now with privatization that we are starting to have problems.

As for your contention that we are not running out of resources, I will not dignify that with a rebuttal. Any fool can see we are rapidly exceeding the earth's capacity to sustain us. We need to cut back in a big way or it will soon be too late.