Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (22562)	7/30/2008 5:56:11 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

None now: <How many people live in cities that have a large power plant in it?> But some do already use waste heat from power stations. When thinking of the future, it pays to not be bound by what already exists. The whole point of inventing new things is to do things differently. Already people are doing things like buying heat pumps, which get electricity from power stations, which drives refrigeration systems which suck heat out of surrounding cold air and uses the energy from the motor and the heat from outside to heat a house. It's not much of a stretch to move the power station inside the house too, especially if the house is a big apartment building. Come to think of it, in Antwerp we had a furnace room INSIDE the house, in the basement and the heat heated the house. We didn't have it generating electricity though. It burned diesel fuel. Not surprisingly, the air was soot laden, because many people had furnaces and most cars sold were diesel, without the pollution control systems now available. London air was soot laden too, because people had furnaces in their houses too, in the form of open fires in the living room and swarms of diesel vehicles roamed London keeping the buildings black. The vehicles which didn't put out soot put out lead. There is no hush-hush in electricity supply and networks. It's boring old electrical engineering going back 100 years. Actually, consumers have lots of choices: <Not to worry, the consumer pays for the lot, and isn't going anywhere. Thats the main thing. > We have gas and use that to heat water because it's cheaper than electricity. We can insulate houses, wear insulating clothing. We can turn lights off and buy energy saving bulbs. Electricity reticulation isn't a monopoly really. There is competition. Carting electricity 1000 km from the south island to Auckland involves significant line losses. Same from Taupo to Auckland. A nuclear reactor in Auckland would involve low line losses. Also, the warm water from cooling would create a great swimming zone and tropical fish could move in. Another big advantage of a nuclear reactor in Auckland is that when [not if] Taupo erupts again, destroying the Waikato river and ALL the electricity supplies, Auckland would remain in business. At present there are a couple of little power stations in Auckland and a few emergency generators at hospitals, motels etc. Mqurice