To my comment about drilling for oil being blocked by the environmental wackos, the Demo Left and dummy RINOs being an OLD excuse, he responded with about the only comment that lets Bush off the hook.
Drilling for oil in America wouldn't do much for the present crisis. It's like a heroin junkie saying they'll quit using in two weeks.
Uh, having quit smoking one time I can tell you that what you have to do is "quit." Rationalization does nothing towards solving the problem. Plus, a President screaming for new oil drilling would send a huge psychological shot across OPEC's bow.
His solution?
My solution is using solar power in a variety of applications including CSP, as outlined in a recent article on Salon.com
Well now, that's pretty definitive. It solves the problems of how the power can be stored and used later, like say "night time." It also solves the problem of transmission of the power from the acres and acres of solar panel farms, including, of course where they will be located. (Sarcasm alert.)
CSP makes use of the most abundant and free fuel there is, sunlight, and key countries have a vast resource. Solar thermal plants covering the equivalent of a 92-by-92-mile square grid in the Southwest could generate electricity for the entire United States.
I mean you do understand something called Ohm's law don't you?? What it says is that when you run current through resistance, a voltage drop occurs between the generation point (the CSP) the transmission lines and the "load," of the users.... Now that's a great simplification, but I trust you get the idea.
Simpler. There is a finite distance you can transmit electrical power without suffering an unacceptable loss.
As for heat storage to keep the generators running when the sun is not available, there is another small problem called The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Again let me help you. What that says is that hot things become cold if not continually heated. And no place have I seen a reasonable solution to this problem. If it requires X amount of energy to heat the source of power to turn the turbines, then the amount required to be generated is equal to [(2)(X)] plus the nominal loss of initial storage. In other words, if 10 watts are required to run the generators, and additional 10 watts must be stored at a temperature that overcomes the storage loss, and the linear loss over time.
Can it be done?? I don't know. But I haven't seen anything that would persuade me that it can. Especially if the 8 to 10 cents per KWH is to be met. Instead I see:
So what do we need to do to ramp up CSP? Interestingly, most CSP executives don't talk much about the need for government R&D. They mostly need policies aimed at creating initial market demand that would help bring down costs quickly over the next several years. One such policy is a so-called national renewable portfolio standard, which would require utilities to get a minimum percentage of their electricity from new renewable forms of power, or purchase such power from other utilities. After that, the typical manufacturing learning curves and economies of scale -- plus a market price for carbon dioxide set by the cap-and-trade system -- should do the rest.
Simpler. Provide us a market a much higher price than what we have now. Heck. No wonder they don't want government R&D. They want a much better deal.
Having said all of the above, am I for it? Yes. If it is at the same price I pay now.
So your solution is an unproven technology available in an unknown time frame at an unknown cost.......?
I rest my case. Drill, jawbone and threaten.
