UP is still in the refrigerated freight business. In fact, they've been expanding their fleet fairly rapidly. They currently have 3500 50' refrigerated boxcars and 1500 64' cars (all 1500 64' cars have been purchased in the last 5 years). They also carry more than a small amount of refrigerated cargo in containers on their intermodal trains.

"Pacific Fruit Express?"

sounds like the plot of "east of eden"

A very good point.

Local production of fruits and vegetables in California and Florida exceeds the capacity of local markets to absorb. OTOH, the Northeast cannot feed itself and has many months of no or greenhouse only production.

Current dietary guidelines suggest five servings of different fruits and vegetables/day. Hard to do in NYC in February from local production.

Substituting non-oil transportation (hopefully largely run by renewable power in the medium term future)for oil based transportation seems to be the easier path than changing American dietary habits, perhaps for the worse.

Alan

Thinking that we will have BAU to utilize and pay for the modified and expanded infrastructure is just magical thinking.

And the alternatives are?

No. Really. What are the alternatives?

Either the government will do it directly (nationalization) or indirectly via tax breaks, or changes in regulation to attract capital.

Who do you expect to pay for the conversions and expansion? I doubt the private sector will, not unless they forecast a mid to long term profitable return.

The private sector. Via shipping costs. And increased taxes. And a spot o land grab via emirate domain.

Besides - if we are generating most of the power via renewables like wind and solar, electrified transport makes for a great dump load. In the case of moving say ore - if the ore takes a bit longer to arrive - its not like the ore is going to spoil.

Bandits.

People Starving. Riots.

These hyperbolic assumptions don't show your own thinking as seeing the big picture here, or really listening to the proposals that Alan has put forth. Did you ever get a chance to read this?
>> http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2006-05a.htm
"A 10% Reduction in America's Oil Use in Ten to Twelve Years
An Overlooked, Practical, and Affordable Approach Using Mature Existing Technology"

While Alan's hardly proposing we simply maintain today's BAU model, his 10% article at Light Rail Now is focused on proactive steps to fortify our transport sector, not replace it. France, nestled snugly into Western Europe could hardly be accused of seeing itself as an island of self-sufficiency, while she's clearly taking steps to improve sustainable transportation and energy options.

"I suspect that the transport problem will sort itself out. It's low priority."
- Well that's the question, I guess.

Bob

One way of looking at the post-Peak Oil situation (and there are several valid POVs, recall a half dozen blind men examining an elephant) is:

Each nation will be able to afford only so much oil, domestic production plus what their exports can buy.

The default solution to making oil burned = oil available is reduced economic activity (see today ?).

Creating a Non-Oil Transportation system with the ability to expand capacity quickly, rapidly and economically (average costs lower as volume expands) creates an alternative solution to "reduced economic activity". As oil gets tighter, a higher and higher % of transportation shifts from oil based to non-oil transportation.

Non-oil transportation creates a viable alternative to simply doing without, and the economic contraction/destruction that goes with that.

As for inter-city railroads, all that is needed is additional public subsidies (could be largely paid for by reduced subsidies for road repairs caused by heavy trucks). The industry wants a 25% tax credit for capital improvements. Increasing that to 33% would certainly spur major improvements.

BTW, the cost to do what I propose for inter-city RRs would cost somewhere between $250 and $400 billion. Expensive if the bulk of that was spent in the first decade (as I hope it would be), but hardly societies largest expenditure.

Best Hopes for NOT sitting back and waiting some more,

Alan

"Thinking that we will have BAU to utilize and pay for the modified and expanded infrastructure is just magical thinking."

How is it magical thinking to allocate current resources to increase efficiency and attack a supply and infrastructure problem practically? We have the power in hand to change now. Why shouldn't we? It's not Alan who suffers from magical delusions. It's your voodoo doomsday black magic that is out of touch with reality.

The current trucking system is wasteful, inefficient and places unnecessary strains on current FF supply. If we can shore up, leverage, and expand existing rail infrastructure and reduce consumption by 10% it provides a practical mitigation to the peak oil problem.

We are not necessarily short on resources now. We have severely misallocated billions in Iraq that could be building comprehensive renewable and more efficient energy infrastructure at home.

As the old oil infrastructure attempts to drag us over the cliff of peak oil, we will need new infrastructure to keep civilization in place. Certainly, there is a danger of system-wide infrastructure crash -- but only if we ignore the problem, fail to build mitigating infrastructure, and otherwise fail to respond appropriately.

As for France -- they will likely be in a better position to weather the crisis than we will if we continue to fail to act.

What is most shocking to me is not Alan's focus on trains as part of the solution to peak oil, but the assumption by some on this board that a return to cart and buggy days is inevitable or even desirable. We should fight tooth and nail to preserve and improve the systems we have while shedding ugly fat (Wal-Mart, suburbia, SUVs etc) and transforming as much as we can.

We can go local and still have cars -- just smaller ones that we use less because we don't need them so much. We can use trains more for long distance transport and travel. We can have less aircraft aloft but still have a higher priced option for jet travel (and potentially more efficient turboprops on biofuel) with hydrogen powered aircraft as a future, post crisis, potential. We can replace natural gas and coal with solar and wind with energy storage and a new generation of nuclear plants. We can increase battery and electric power for industrial tools that build things like X2G autos, farm, mining, and metal producing equipment. In essence, we can leverage our fossil fuel endowment to transition to a non-fossil fuel economy. It will not be BAU. It will be an economic revolution in response to crisis.

Or we can hunker down, watch the system crash, and pray to the gods we can grow enough food ala Kunstler. Perhaps that is our ultimate fate. But people like you would have us go down into a very dark hole without even a peep of protest.

freeyourmind,

I think that OPEC is correct. The worldwide supply of oil does meet demand. Of course, as prices escalate, demand is destroyed therefore supply can go down... and tada... worldwide supply of oil still meets demand. OPEC can keep saying "supply meets demand" as oil production declines year after year because prices will just keep rising to destroy the demand.

ZW

Parts of the Point Beach nuclear power plant in Manitowoc County were briefly evacuated after a nearby convenience-store clerk misunderstood a comment of a new employee.

The clerk told Two Rivers police that a man entered her store Tuesday about 7:15 a.m. and asked for directions to the power plant. As the man was leaving, the clerk heard him say he "came to blow up the place."

Run for the hills!

Longer term, superinsulation may help transmission of electric via superconducting cables:

Led by Argonne senior scientist Valerii Vinokur and Russian scientist Tatyana Baturina, an international team of scientists from Argonne, Germany, Russia and Belgium fashioned a thin film of titanium nitride which they then chilled to near absolute zero. When they tried to pass a current through the material, the researchers noticed that its resistance suddenly increased by a factor of 100,000 once the temperature dropped below a certain threshold. The same sudden change also occurred when the researchers decreased the external magnetic field.

http://www.physorg.com/news126797387.html

if we can get around ERCOTs refusal to be under FERC regulation for inter-state commerce

I was recently pointing at ERCOT's refusal as a wonderful example of local-local-local and the need for communities to become mostly sufficient within their "visible horizon".

Many small units (mainly in NE) are removed when 50 year recertification comes up.

The recent dam relicensing with which I'm familiar is 75 year terms without fish ladders. Negotiated in secret until someone blew the whistle. Other issues about water level, etc... as well. That means the elimination of Atlantic eel and salmon and whatever chain reactions that causes.

To my mind, giving those dams to the communities along the rivers and requiring the protection of the environment - fish ladders - is a necessary part of ELP. We can't take power for very long if we destroy the web of life.

One can do great destruction to the environment within the "visible horizon", but one can have no influence over what happens out of sight. Political responsibility, economic responsibility, environmental responsibility and community all have to be coterminous. Otherwise we end up with a virtual trade in energy, water and commodities that drags us all down in the not-quite-short run.

cfm in Gray, ME

This makes imports from Texas and Oklahoma economic

Is this west texas to NO? Do you then think it's unlikely that Arizona CSP will ever power Atlanta?

"One of the big problems with renewables is storage, ...
If one looks at where the energy use happens in a house, much of it goes toward HVAC and hot water production. ..."

- those two items need to be linked. The best "storage" is at the end user. That's for two reasons:

* usage can often be put off until power is available (or cheaper), if one is willing to be flexible. E.g., wash clothes late at night rather than early evening.

* some actual "storage" is built into houses, e.g., if you cool the house overnight (and it is decently insulated) it won't heat up fast during the day. If you have a large well-insulated hot water tank, you can have plenty of hot water for many hours after your smart switch turns the heating element off to avoid using peak-priced power.

The talk assumed business as usual. There was even a graph of projected demand going out to 2040 or 50 and it was a straight line from the 80's on up. There was no discussion of conservation as a strategy, nor, to my surprise, did the question session ever go there.

I should have mentioned, he was primarily discussing base load so there was no discussion of storage. But I'm a bit confused with your assessment. I can see that storage would allow nuclear to not only offset base but also peak capacity. Wouldn't one need either storage or extra peak capacity to use any solar or wind unless it was offsetting existing peak capacity?

There is a huge misconception about solar panels on existing or new housing not being economical. Although there are certain cases where remote locations would need stand-alone systems most urban cases are grid tied systems.

Here is how the grid-tied program works in California:

Under Net Metering Laws CA Utilities are required to purchase excess energy back from energy producers (residential or commercial) during times of less usage. This is given as credit back to the utility user up to zero consumption*. During the day when you are producing more than you need you are a seller. At night when the system stops producing you are a buyer. This eliminates the need for batteries or generators which brings the cost for a system down signifigantly. You do however need an inverter that converts DC power to AC power.

Another advantage CA has is a 5 tiered utility billing system that penalizes high energy users.

The first tier covers the first 290 KWh and at a rate of say $.15 per KWh. The next tier goes up to say $.18 and so on. Once you get above say 750 KWh your costs could be as high as $.45 a KWh. This in effect subsidizes low income people and retirees which drives Republicans crazy!

So if you are consuming less than 500 KWh per month it would be financially less rewarding to purchase solar panels. You might feel good about it but the payback (even with rebates and tax credits) could be 12 to 15 years. But if you have a large McMansion (2500 s.f. or greater) with kids and all of the computers, TV's and appliances then you are probably looking at 1200 to 1500 KWh per month. If you purchase a system that generates enough energy to handle 60-80% of that average use you will be selling or using top tier power and buying tier one & two power. This makes the payoff in as little as 5-7 years.

With rebates covering approximately 25-30% of up-front costs and Federal rebates adding another $2,000 solar looks like a real good buy in CA (if you use a lot of energy). Although this doesn't solve the energy crises for CA it is a large part of the solution, particularly during peak hours (May through September 1 to 5 p.m.)

Sweet!

*This precludes individuals or businesses with land or roof space from being a producer of energy and recieving income from the utility. This is the next legislative hurdle CA is going to address. Once that opens up it will be the engine that will drive the solar revolution in America.

Can they do it? With China's help I think they can.

Right! And with China's help they can increase their oil production by 280% by 2021. Fat chance. Venezuela is in obvious decline. Their current production is 2.44 mb/d and falling. Of course they do have the Orinoco Bitumen.

Current Orinoco Bitumen production is about 600,000 barrels per day. Venezuela is slowly increasing production from the bitumen belt. However increases from that area are not keeping pace with declines from Lake Maricopa and other areas.

But surely you are aware of Chavez’s tendency to exaggerate. The IEA, EIA, BP and everyone else says Venezuela’s oil production is around 2.4 to 2.5 mb/d. However Chavez insist that Venezuela is producing 3.3 mb/d. See Venezuelan Oil Stats War.

Chavez wants everyone to think Venezuela is producing a lot more oil than it actually is producing. And he wishes everyone to believe that they can produce almost three times as much in the future. And he wishes everyone to believe he can build his own oil rigs and tanker fleet. Either the man is mad or he is just a plain liar, or both.

Ron Patterson

Yes, I will elaborate. The total production includes 600,000 bp/d in new production from the Orinoco Bitumen. If you only look at their regular oil, they are producing 1.84 mb/d down from 3.28 mb/d. That is a decline of over 56%. That is not very modest.

The Orinoco Bitumen is rather like the Canadian Oil Sands. It is very heavy tar that must be mined rather than pumped. They can increase production but only in the same way that Canada is increasing their tar sands output. It is very expensive to produce and requires a lot of labor and equipment. It requires a lot of natural gas and is also very difficult to refine. After all, it is TAR.

Ron Patterson

He is building Urban Rail at a fast clip, and some expansion of inter-city rail. He also finished a 2 GW hydroelectric dam started before he took office.

Alan

And you are dead wrong. I have no personal emotional feelings about Chavez whatsoever. I simply think he is nuts. When Chavez inflates his oil production by almost a million barrels per day when all the world knows he are lying tells us something very profound about the man. And when a man does such a thing then everything else he says must be taken with a liberal serving of salt. Would you not agree?

Ron Patterson

You mean General Betray-us? Hat tip to---(fill in your name)

Beggar--
Stiglitz can be listined to here.
http://www.againstthegrain.org/AtG%202008.03.25_Stiglitz.mp3
(This is on Against The Grain, one of the few truly great resources of media in the US)
Check Against The Grain at:
http://www.againstthegrain.org

beggar - Stiglitz was on Kudlow & Co (CNBC) last night for about 10 minutes.

Their book (a href="http://www.amazon.com/Three-Trillion-Dollar-War-Conflict/dp/0393067017/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207764354&sr=8-1"> The Three Trillion Dollar War came out a little more than a month ago. At the time there was some coverage. I've seen several interviews with them, NPR, DemocracyNow, C-SPAN, etc. The pair wrote an Op-Ed piece that ran in the Washington Post and was probably syndicated nationwide. This piece (which might be the same as the Alternet piece you posted) was also commented on by many other media outlets including CNN and Bloomberg.

Judging from the interviews I saw, I think that they have done some good research. I have yet to read the book though, because I think their conclusions aren't really a revelation to anyone that's been paying attention.

A bigger scandal that continuously flies under the radar is how shabbily we treat our veterans. I saw where a reporter compared the amount of disability awarded to veterans over the years. In 2005, the Army gave out the same amount of money for disability as they had in 2001 even though there were thousands of injured soldiers returning from Iraq.

Stiglitz was featured by the PBS Nightly Business Report a couple of days ago. I also heard it mentioned by a congresscritter during one of the Petraeus hearings today.

Hello theantidoomer.

I responded to one of your posts yesterday and expected a reply
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3816#comment-327878
I did not get any. Get this:"Recoverable reserves are not the issue. Canadian tarsands have huge recoverable reserves. What matters is how fast can you get it out, and for what energy costs (and water, in the case of tar sands).

Let it just be clear to you that any viable production rate from Bakken will have hardly any influence on the overall energy picture, if at all"

Now I'll just wait patiently again.....

"detailing the amount of technically recoverable oil"

i dont think your car will go very far on gasoline made from "technically recoverable oil", on the other hand, you will save a bundle.

Yesterday--Elwoodelmore provided this:

"through 2007, the bakken had produced 43 million barrels in north dakota. 2007 production was 7.4 million barrels from 457 wells (producing at year end). do the math."

I did the math:

"Lets see--7,400,000/457=16,192.56/365=44.363178bbl/d x @100/bbl=$4,436.3178 per day gross revenue. If someone knew the developmental and operational costs, we could see the general net profit per well and make some comparisons."

Just so its clear, that is 44.363178 barrels of oil per day average from the 457 producing wells. Not 400, 4,000 or 40,000 but 44.

The Bakken is another indicator that petroleum hydrocarbons will be available for quite some time, except they won't be available in any appreciable volume/flow rate to make any impact on the effects of peak oil.

Here, again for third time, is a site with much current info on the Bakken formation:
www.ndoil.0rg

This site has much information on the geology, techniques used in producing the oil, and even a link to a conference on current efforts by the E & P companies in North Dakota.

Facts according to this site:
1. Only 1% of oil in place is recoverable with best current technology.
2. Cost for a well with three horizontal legs and fracturing (all required to get reasonable production) is $6 million in 2006 dollars, closer to $10 million now.
3. Most wells are 10,000 feet deep with legs of 9000 feet.
4. With the formation covering such a huge area lack of infrastructure is a problem. (lack of roads, rail lines, electricity)

north dakota produced 127,073 bopd in december, 2007, up from about 80,000 bopd in 2003. nd will quite possibly exceed their 8'84 peak of 147,668 bopd in the next year or so. some, but not nearly all of the increase is from the bakken. the bakken averaged about 20,000 bpd for all of 2007.

the williston basin is one area where price has resulted in producers being able to increase production via the drill bit.

the north dakota industrial commission oil and gas division publishes a lot of free data. i wasnt able to copy and paste (it is a secure site ?), but you can find their website on the google. you can go to general statistics for historical oil production.

Moneyman,

Is this lack of manpower a fault of the oil industry????? Why aren't they working with universities to attract people into the business?.. manpower is a long-term investment. (There are only - what? - two schools now in the U.S. that offer courses in petroleum engineering.)

I've heard Ken Deffeyes speak on the shortage of young students going into the petroleum business, and I THINK (don't remember) that he also mentioned that the oil companies weren't really promoting the profession... so I'm wondering if what I heard from my friends had serious merit (of course, the exeptions tend to get the attention). This lack of long-term investment doesn't seem logical; but then, a lot of recent news stories about the way CEOs run businesses have strained the parameters of my imagination... which is nice for daydreaming, but-

You make, I think, a good point.

I'm spending time on the alternatives we have for roadways in the near future. Clearly as it becomes difficult and expensive to maintain the roads they will gain more pot holes. Eventually the average speed will become so low that it will be better to break up the remaining asphalt and convert the roads back to dirt. I don't expect many (if any) new roads to be built.

However, goods and people will still have to get around and a paved surface is still better than a dirt road. I'd like to figure out a way to put the many unemployed people to work rebuilding the roads, demolishing bridges that can no longer be maintained, etc.

But what paved surface is appropriate post-peak? Here is where I am in that exploration. Comments encouraged.

Links to Wikipedia for each paving type:

• Cobblestone
• Macadam
• Tarmac
• Bitumous Surface Treatment
• Asphalt
• Concrete

A fragile, expensive, impractical toy. Beyond the problem of 3 wheel tracks, the outboard, unprotected wheels area particularly bad idea. Combined with the use of expensive materials, it ensures that these will never be more than a rich man's curiosity.

A couple of years ago a development was started at the far end of our small country road. Our Township approved it, mostly because the developer agreed to repave the road after the trucks were done destroying it. Now they have built 2 models and will soon be out of business. The amount of money they put in escrow was inadequate even then, now it is a joke. Bottom line: It is unlikely our road will ever be repaved, and there are a lot of other roads in the same condition. A vehicle like this one would never have a chance.

The wheels on our old horse cart are 52" in diameter - ever wonder why that is?

Lots of rural vehicles in china are three wheeled with single cylinder diesels and the roads there arent what you'd call smooth, some would be hard pressed to be called roads at all.

At $6.00 per gallon? What gas price are you choosing?

Did we have a problem with people spending 50 grand on Escalades out of raw ego and paranoia? (As the Ford SUV consultant told his boss: "If you put a machine gun on top it'll sell better.") Obviously cars have been sold for largely absurd reasons, especially in America: convertibles, muscle cars, pony cars, monster trucks, four by fours that never leave the pavement, fake Mercedes, fake Ferraris, real Ferraris, anything with a vinyl roof, and any stretch limo bigger than a Fleetwood Series 75. I am amazed that spending extra for an environmental statement is treated as a special form of blasphemy.

As for the small cars, they're getting marked up like crazy. Since America doesn't make any of them, the collapse of the $ must drive their cost up until the Chinese arrive. Check out small car prices on European websites to peek into our near future.

15,000 miles/year:

30mpg combined cycle = 500 gallons X $4 (soon) = $2000

Cost of pure electric Aptera = $26,500

Electricity cost approx 1.5 cents/mile = $225

So it won't take too many years of driving to break even.

While oil prices are up close to 90% from March, 2007. Kind of sounds like importers bidding for declining net oil exports.

That will be the national song on Memorial Day.

Regarding low refinery utilization numbers, my take on the issue:

Declining Net Oil Exports Versus “Near Record High” Crude Oil Inventories: What is going on? (September, 2007)
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2975

I expect to see crude oil exports trending down, crude oil prices trending up, refinery utilization trending down, product prices trending up, and product inventories trending down.

And, as if on cue (Uptop link)

Saudi Aramco Expects Khursaniyah On-Stream This Month

But of course OPEC isn't increasing production but it's nice to know they now have even more extra capacity not to pump!

Oil, Gasoline have crossed new all time highs again. $112.19 on NYMEX and all 11 indicies over 100.

http://www.upstreamonline.com/market_data/?id=markets_crude

NG, Gold up. Dollar, stocks, have that familiar post-rally pattern. The only thing holding us back is cheap fuel! So annoying maneuvering around this elephant.

Alan,

In much of Europe gas is already $9 so at your ridiculously cheap prices why will anyone cut back? it's no surprise that with less than 5% of the world's population the US manages to use 25%.

In Europe i don't see too many horse drawn carts but roads clogged and with plenty of Mercedes, BMWs & Porsches (gas guzzlers) so the price needs to go way higher yet to have any effect:-(

creg...I would not put a lot of 'stock' in what is happening in the stock market for several reasons.

1) Stock manipulation is as old as stock markets and is practiced by a variety of institutions and individuals.

2) The vast majority of economic coverage on tv is aimed at the stock markets and small to medium size players in same. History proves that without a doubt these 'investors' are for the most part totally unaware of what is happening. They listen to the bubble heads on tv and are sucked in. Very few stock market investors today have a basic understanding of bubble formation, what happened to cause recent recessions, or an understanding of what happened during the great depression. So, anyting that happens in the stock market this summer will not surprise me but what will happen by 2010 is going to happen regardless of what the Fed or institutional or individual investors do in the meantime.

3) I am not sure that I understand your question 're reinflating this summer'...The game the Fed is currently playing is a 'one more day in the sun' affair. The hope is that the day of reckoning can be put off long enough for real estate, commercial and residential, to 'normalize' and sales to pick up, saving the banks from huge write downs of bad loans. There are only two ways for this to happen...incomes have to rise 30-40% to make housing affordable to the people that want a house. Home prices have to come down the same amount to make them affordable at current incomes. Incomes are not going up so only option 2 is left.

4) Since a large portion of GDP has been derived from financial institutions the Fed is putting a great deal of effort into 'normalizing or recapitalizing' those institutions. Under the old rules for banking these institutions are already insolvent. New rules are being made up daily in an attempt to rescue the financials. Every new rule change is cheered by the bubble heads on tv and the details of the changes allowing banks to survive for a little longer are not revealed for some time...meanwhile the 'investors' rush out and buy financial stocks, boosting share value for a few days. Will this continue to work? Read 'The Great Crash, 1929' by John Kenneth Galbraith and I think the answer to how this will end will be revealed to you. The mass hysteria ends at some point. Reality begins to seep into the consciousness of even the most out of touch bulls. It is very difficult, even in hindsight, to put a finger on the exact moment or event that caused the crash of any market...There are many theories. One thing that we do know...Bubbles always burst and no amount of Fed intervention or manipulation is going to stop this one from bursting.

4) As I have said many times...oil prices are determined on world markets and they will continue up as long as the BRIC economies are roaring and bidding up oil prices. There could be some demand destruction caused by a world wide economic recession/depression. How much is hotly debated and depends on ones belief, or not, in decoupling of economies. After any such recession, if it happens, oil will continue its upward price movement. Because of many factors, especially ELM, the price of oil will be UP. If the Fed continues to devalue the dollar all commodity prices will trend up.

5) I am not a financial guru but economics has always been fascinating to me...an avocation. Right now I am short dollars, long physical precious metals, and have a couple of rental properties that I should have sold in 04. What the hey, we all make mistakes. Good luck. :)

Fresh capital infusion for new plants means no liquidity problems going forward. Pacific Ethanol is ready to compete head to head with big oil if all subsidies and tax breaks are removed from both industries. (be careful what you wish for) Oh, and food price consequenses be damned basically. Also said Ethanol at $2.85 was a better value than $3.34 gasoline. (Hmm that's close to 51 cents)
Given the BTU choice I'd go with the petrol.

Dave;
I'm not sure of your calculation behind Oil's price rise Closing the gap, when PV production, like everything else is dependent upon energy inputs for its own pricing, plus the economic condition of the economy, employees who are facing rising food and commute and home energy costs.. I don't see how that tide isn't going to 'Raise all prices', such that the gap may not narrow much or any, in addition to the fact that the consumer's buying power seems clearly to be eroding.

I highly doubt that PV prices will get lower. I'm certainly not willing to wait and see. Since I now do have a 'survival quantity' of some 300watts, my present efforts and my recommendations to other friends/families are that solar heating and cooking are the most critical energy sources to secure and get off the monthly bills.

Aside from it's energy value, it might be worth considering that if electricity prices continue to grow, and grid stability becomes less secure, (how big an IF are these two?).. that the potential for a surge in Demand will make PV prices grow as well, and that if you have invested in some of them, you may find that their resale has a profit to it, if the basic usefullness of them doesn't outweigh their resale value.

I say buy some. They work, and they do so for a long, long time. Dead Simple. (After MFG)

Bob

Eric, I did not know what to make of that, and then I saw it was by the bloke who invented the 'Laddermill' high altitude wind power concept - that adds buckets of cred, as far as I am concerned.

In fact, my preference for nuclear power is conditional on nothing better coming along, and I always thought that high-altitude wind should be able to do the job a lot cheaper - it is just that I am cautious about assuming that we can do something until the engineering is fairly fully developed.

I suppose a criticism would be that fast turbines might kill birds and bats, but I have never really understood why this is so difficult - surely LED lights could be mounted, which would not have to shine unless the rotors were going round, and would certainly scare away birds for a trivial power drain.

Is there some reason why this is impractical?

Alan, is it possible to make mass transit Godzilla proof? :)

Deep subways, such as Pyongyang, Peoples Republic of Korea, have demonstrated Godzilla resistance, other than the surface entrances.

However, passengers can usually crawl around the rubble and find their way to and from the subway.

Surface rail, just like the San Francisco streetcars that were working the day after the Great Earthquake, can usually be operational just a day or two after a Godzilla "visit".

Best Hopes for rail resilience,

Alan

What if Godzilla gets ticked because the spinning turbines keep him awake? What if he wades ashore and eats London?

Dude.

Did you eat a lot of Sugary cereal this morning?
You sound like my daughter.

Depressed Economies. Isn't that also the times when a society like ours actually wakes up and gets motivated? How did Hoover dam get built? WPA TVA .. etc.

No more cereal, young man.

Bob

Bad news also for wind turbines if the quid learn to fly........

Actually, we were talking about wind turbines.

Those are rather different to underwater turbines, I believe.

It helps to read a post before critiquing it!

I think that the proper question is why should solar have to compete, and I fully agree. We have to make the right choices - this is kind of like having a Corvette and being able to go as fast as we want, knowing that there may (or may not) be a highway patrol down the road. There is no cop to enforce the solar, though, but it is the right thing to do.

I know that capitalism is the mechanism which is keeping most folk out of solar by the price mechanism, but we, as a species, have to start doing the right thing.

That's good Leanan, that's really good. I am going to use that line in the future. Thanks.

Or, as friends of mine point out - those profits are owned by individuals who then spend the money to stimulate the economy which benefits everyone. Sometimes "wall", "hitting", and "head", feel like they were made for each other...

Hello Kjmclark,

Thxs for responding. Yep, saw my mention, but I agree with what WT & Simmons say: I would rather be wrong.

High prices are bad enough, but it is outright shortages that worry me because growing plants can't wait; the topsoil needs the NPK applied in a timely fashion to avoid a Liebig and leverage harvest yields.

Another link, this time from Down Under:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/10/2213271.htm
---------------------------
Reports of a fertiliser shortage for the state's grain farmers are widening, with fears it could damage chances of farmers bouncing back from the drought.

He says this includes reports of some suppliers trying to dishonour contracts.

Let me say it doesn't just stop at fertiliser, we've heard similar things from some sources in relation to chemicals, so it couldn't have happened at a worse time."
--------------------------------
His mention of chemicals I assume to mean pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and other products used on the soil or crops.

EDIT: another link on potential monopolistic practices:

http://therural.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/farmers-attack-ferti...
----------------------------------
Fertiliser suppliers and farmers made the claims of market distortion in submissions to the senate inquiry headed by Junee Senator Bill Heffernan, which is investigating possible cartel behaviour in the fertiliser and chemical industries.

The price of fertiliser products has spiralled in the last year, with the majority going up by 100 to 200 per cent and some products rising as much as 400 per cent.

“The association often receives comments from members questioning how there can be fertiliser stock piled in sheds or on ships waiting to be unloaded yet the retailers do not have any available for sale or they cannot inform the customer of when it will be available or at what price,” the association’s submission stated.

The association also raised speculation over possible monopolistic behaviour from the dominant company Incitec Pivot, which controls more than 50 per cent of Australia’s agricultural plant nutrient needs....
-----------------------
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

Eric, apparently there have been some pretty bad spills and leaks into groundwater from various forms of nastiness associated with solar PV production in China,

1) Apparently - See, I asked Charles Barton over in the fission thread to provide proof of his claim. Glad you qualified the claim 'it appears' - as no one has proof at this time.
2) Now I have not idea if the issue is because of PV or if the issue is 'standard' manufacturing waste - what in the US would be called a 'brownfield'.

but to my mind that just shows that you have to take reasonable precautions whatever you do.

Yes. One can look at the history of the industrial revolution and how 'the captians of industry' could not stop crapping up their own nests - thus government regulations came into effect.

You can't design a more dangerous and polluting system than the use of coal

*coff* fission *coff*

Other fission news:
http://www.google.com/search?q=explosion+at+the+Pakistani+nuclear+facility
Yesterday was a double+good fission plant news day.

Been using natural, self produced NPK on the grass and bushes for the last six months. These fertilized plants are really growing fast and dark green.

Urine? (Not joking - urine contains lots of NPK ) (bolding mine)

Sounds like just another of an endless string of hardworking, hustling, intelligent BS artists-knowing what you are talking about is extremely overrated.

re: Yergin's fluency.. remember, it's all about flow.