What's the most redpilled form of energy production?

>>8641764
Using the force of waves in order to produce more free energy, do easy traveling and finally fix climate change but it's still not made anyway.

>>8641764

I liked that anon,s idea yesterday of pulling electricity out of the atmosphere.

File: Michio Kaku.jpg (158KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 630x420px

>>8641764
replacing useless roof tiles with efficient solar panels will power every single home and then some.
also force businesses to be powered from on site solar panels (this will limit companies from getting too powerful and making too much waste, or having political influence).
i just solved all energy and pollution issues, and destroyed globalism.
where do i accept my nobel prize?

>>8641810
>want to build a quadrillion solar panels
>but limits solar panel production facilities and all the facilities generating and extracting their resources to be as inefficient as possible
Yeah that seems foolproof.

>>8641764
fission.

>>8641764
Really cold fusion.

genetically modified algae grown in artificial lagoons

Good old hydro obviously

>>8641764
Metabolism.

>>8641810
SOLAR
FREAKING
ROOFTOPS

>>8641764
if you don't want: fracking oil natural gas coal and war, you're a liberal.

>>8641810
>every single home
Elon musk himself said that the solar tiles are only able to produce ~1/3 of the energy requirements of an avarage home + an electric car, so even actual rooftop solar panels are most likely not enough to power an average home. Also, some people live in high-rise buildings.
>this will limit companies from getting too powerful and making too much waste
The actual fix to that problem is recycling, and not going back to the middle ages. It would also raise prices, so you'd end up with even more economic inequality (something you probably care about).
>or having political influence
That can be fixed by laws and not by limiting companies. What you'd actually end up with this way is political power concentrated in the hands of the even fewer companies that can grow despite the energy constraints (facebook, for example, has many carbon-neutral datacenters, while being one of the largest companies).

>>8641918
Except it's an economically viable technology that has been in use for decades now, unlike the "solar freaking roadways".

>>8641764
I think the most red-pilled would be nuclear, since many blue-pilled normies are afraid of it, since radiation is black magic to them, while nuclear is one of the technologies that work with existing infrastructure (no need for ridiculous amounts of energy storage), and a chernobyl every few decades is still better than global warming.
>b-b-but muh nuclear waste
You only have to store it for ~1000 years to get rid of most of the radiation, and it's not like yucca mountain is going anywhere in the next couple million years.

>>8641764
>redpilled

What does this mean? It means 2009 wants its memes back. Redpilled implies knowledgeable, as in you've peeked behind the curtain to see what really goes on. As in you are enlightened or "woke" as the pot faggots say. Thus, you are asking what form of energy production is the most enlightened. Yet, non-sentient things can't be enlightened. They aren't even self aware. It isn't a political term or a term used to denote your fanbase or opinions. Do you know what this is? This is me redpilling you on the term redpill. Do you feel enlightened now?

The only thing I can draw from this is that you are asking for the energy production form that is the most well studied. The one we know the most about and are totally enlightened about its workings. Ironically, that is wind power, simply because humans have been using wind power for moving ships around since before 5,000BC. We don't harness it in any other manner than having it push objects around to make mechanical or electrical energy. It doesn't mean I give a shit about wind power. It doesn't mean I'm pushing an agenda for wind power over any other form of energy production. It just means humanity knows all there is to know about using wind as a form of energy production, far better than all other forms of energy production, even hydro.

File: 02_smartmat_905.jpg (100KB, 905x347px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 905x347px

>>8641894
So when are chemists going to make photosynthesis more efficient?

>>8641764
Rounding up all the degenerates, LGBT, SJWs, feminists, shitskins and muslims and forcing them to cycle like hamsters to power a generator which converts their kinetic energy to electrical energy.

File: 847169841228430465.jpg (46KB, 600x817px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x817px

>>8641985

>>8641995
He listed degenerates too.

>>8641985
Is fapping to "hand expression" videos on youtube considered "degenerate".

File: 75f48aa3878cf9dde5a89132464718b6.jpg (22KB, 550x425px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 550x425px

>>8642001
>"hand expression" videos on youtube

>>8641764
>tfw never be an offshore wind turbine maintenance worker

>>8642029
Those things are fucking massive. I bet you could actually live inside one for a long time before someone found you. Might be a bit noisy though.

>>8641985
>forcing them to cycle like hamsters
>to power a generator
"Black Mirror" series, Season One,
Episode Two "15 Million Merits"

File: the_sheep_lies.jpg (121KB, 720x514px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 720x514px

>>8641764
Fusion... why capture the sun's energy when you can create your own sun.

>>8642059
>when you can create your own sun.
Since when?

It has forever been 30 years into the future.

>>8641967
Plus, with modern breeder technology, nuclear waste can be brought down to a practically insignificant amount

File: IMG_3807.png (104KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 2000x2000px

>>8641764
Honestly it has to be nuclear, but trying to convince the public that it is safe while also competing with oil and natural gas seems almost unachievable.

>>8641970
>you are asking for the energy production form that is the most well studied
You're dumb. Being redpilled means knowing something most people don't. So the most redpilled form of energy production would be something most people don't appreciate or have misconceptions about. Like if you somehow knew that the global warming was a hoax, the most redpilled form of energy production would be oil (of course it's not a hoax, but that's beside the point).
Also, the fact that we've used wind power for the longest time doesn't mean that we know the most about that one. Not to mention that the form of power generation we've used for the longest time is probably fire.

>>8641764
em drive energy

>>8642133
>Being redpilled means knowing something most people don't.

No. It means being an obnoxious faggot who thinks they understand more than a trained professional after watching a 15 minute YouTube video.

Go back to /pol/ with your stupid bullshit.

>>8642064
>le 30 years meme
Please cite a scientific paper from the past that says we would definitely have achieved fusion power within the following three decades. Oh wait, you can't, because the thirty years meme is probably quote mined from a couple overly enthusiastic scientists. Meanwhile, in real life, scientists have actually made a lot of progress over the last thirty years.

Definitely not wind energy.

DEFINITELY not wind energy on the fucking water.

>>8641764
How about finding a catalytic way to regenerate fuel from CO2 using solar or electric energy. Chemical energy is easy to handle/store and the existing infrastructure must not be replaced by new collectors/wires/other shit.
Make a cycle of energy like nature does it with the whole plants (CO2 to O2) and animals (O2 to CO2).

>>8642150
The red pill meme originates from the matrix movies you dumb fuck, where it meant exactly the thing I just described. And wind power may very well be the form of power generation we understand the most, mr. trained professional, but not because we've used for the longest time. All that knowledge we've accumulated about wind over millenia before the 1900s could be researched in a couple years with modern methods, because using something for thousands of years is not the same as actually understanding it.

>>8642150
Also, I never said I was "redpilled" in any way, so no, I don't have to go "back" to /pol/. Learn some reading comprehension.

>>8642064
We can build a plant right now though. It wouldn't be a very good plant and it would break down often and take ridiculous effort to maintain, but most of the basics are through now. That's why ITER is being built and that's pretty much already outdated already now. Plus in a year or two we'll know if optimized Stellerators are viable as well.
Yeah it'll still take a few more decades, but this time we really have all the unknowns nailed down in experiments. Tokamaks and stellerators won't magically do worse again. The problem with the Fusion meme was that previous researchers never really knew what the fuck they were actually talking about and just filled in the unknown science with "eh, I bet plasma physics is gonna be easy"

>>8642169

>The red pill meme originates from the matrix movies you dumb fuck, where it meant exactly the thing I just described

Not him but most people know where the meme comes from, the problem lies within the assumption that there is a "truth" worth keeping secret.

As far as energy is concerned there isn't, all the cards have been laid out on the table for everyone to see. All that's left is fighting over which energy to invest in.

>>8641978
you mean microbiologists

File: 1444436457527.jpg (29KB, 700x587px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 700x587px

>>8642192
The most efficient, fossil fuels until they are gone. Even governments figured that out.

>>8641764
OTEC for planets with water.
Zero Point for space.

File: RadWasteGlass.jpg (34KB, 300x279px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 300x279px

>>8642073
my biggest concern is disposal of nuclear waste and nuclear material. I'd be fine with it if they turned it into glass, but stuffing it into rusty metal barrels and burring it out of sight seems ..... just stupid.

>>8641764
Nuclear

>>8642064
Scientists who claim we are X years away are the same kinds of scientists who forecasted catastrophic global warming effects by 2016

>>8642334
No different than landfills. Believe me if there was an effective way to recycle nuclear waste it would have been implemented long ago

>>8642336
Which ones were those?

>>8642334
Not an argument.

>>8642317
im doing a wind energy course in my uni

i keep thinking about this pic

how fucking depressing, you spend most of your life reading and studying and solving problems in order to get the credentials to work on an actual turbine probably because your soul belongs to wind turbines

then you die on top of one.

all those manhours
all that money
as trump would say, sad!

>>8642348
Does your course perform cost-benefit analysis on windmills? If so you'd know as much as anyone else here that they're full retard

dirty fucking coal

>>8642337
Look up how France does it.

>>8642342
James Hansen is the first one that comes to mind

>>8642357
they just dump it into the ocean off africa

norway generates nearly all its electricity from hydropower.

why can't we all just make lots of mountains?

>>8642361
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://fissilematerials.org/library/rr04.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwibiOqn_uzRAhWGvrwKHUmQChEQFggmMAE&usg=AFQjCNE4exCjHapfnc3KLJc8RlLagyEz1Q&sig2=rWfRzJn56ErSzh5CeQKJqw

>>8642348
someone needs to engineer an escape plan in case of fires. Like a parachute only deployable from <120 feet. Maybe an auto inflating hamster ball or auto inflating giant wing suit.

>>8642357
I'm aware that there are a plethora of added security to prevent contamination from nuclear waste sites but it's still conceptually similar to a landfill. The energy efficiency and lack of a fossil feul atmospheric byproduct makes fission the gold standard of efficient energy production. The major concern is the initial investment cost and how political/economic factors may stop projects mid-construction. SMRs can combat this a good bit.

>>8642139
>drive
>energy
get the fuck out of here moron

I don't pay attention to nuclear tech, are thorium reactors still shit?

>>8641764
Solar for sure.

>>8642402
it's a meme

like everything that isn't fossil

Harvesting human body radiation

>>8642437
Thanks Morpheus

Nuclear+Solar
Geothermal and Hydro where available.

>>8642334
The way burying radioactive barrels works is simple. They have buried it far beneath an ancient sandflat and in millions of years from now that sand will collapse onto it and contain the radiation to a fixed area.

By the time it's actually hazardous, our people will have destroyed this Earth and be inhabiting another planet.

>>8641978
And then what?
You don't get usable energy directly.
Have to convert it to heat first so you lose efficiency.

>>8642073
>Takes too long to build.
>Burns only a small amount of fuel
>Rest is buried as a problem for future generations.
>Still a steam generating machine at heart.
>Needs extensive security and maintenance
>Needs trained individual.


I could go on but its really not that repelled.
It better than almost anything we have sure except Hydro.
God I love Hydroelectric power!

>>8641764
Since red-pilled means gimicky pseudoscience perpetuated by fake news the answer is the Rodin Coil.

>>8642185
>just filled in the unknown science with "eh, I bet plasma physics is gonna be easy"
That does not sound scientific.

The question is: would it work, as in produce net energy?

>>8641764
solar master race.

windfags are so delusional.

>>8641764
Nuclear fission is by far the best centralized energy production method. Hydro is better, but can only be applied in select locations.

Solar is best for decentralized electricity, getting better every year as solar cell and battery tech improves.

>>8641810
>also force businesses
>force
>businesses
Commies get out REEEEEE

>>8642052
>racemixing future
>the nigger gets jewed out of his dead brother's cash and then cucked
Truly a brave new world.

Memes aside I thought it was such a dumb concept. They are incredibly inefficient as power producers. Why even use them? Using a them as a fucking low grade heat source, extracted from air, would probably be more efficient. I mean what kind of a shitty dystopian future has anti fat biking living facilities. Are they imprisoned there? Literally nobody is productive except few people. Hell, fatties are the most productive people I could see. The concept just triggers my autism.

>>8642689
>That does not sound scientific.
They made some very wrong assumptions about plasma originally and thought it would just work.
This of course failed completely.
Then Russians found the Tokamak and people were already hyped again like "now it's really only like 2 decades".
But as it turned out plasma was still being a bitch even in Tokamaks.
So now we've studied Tokamaks for decades and most importantly we have new superconducting coils that can generate stronger magnetic fields.
So ITER is being built right now and with its size and magnetic field strength, it will put out more power than it takes.
But Tokamaks still have some issues with occasional surges that could damage the reactor.
Then there's the issue that Tokamaks need to shut down every couple of hours for about half an hour, which is not ideal at all for a power plant.
Lastly, the most annoying thing is the radiation degrading the reactor wall and contaminating the plasma or degrading the coils. This is especially annoying since these reactors are almost impossible to open and maintain.

This is why ITER is still a plant-scale experiment.

The stellerator they built in Germany now does theoretically not have any of these problems, except the last one. So they're still experimenting with different materials to sort that out.
But the stellerator of course has the major problem that basically every single fucking part of it needs to be accurate to the millimeter everywhere which is just a nightmare to build.

>>8642689
>The question is: would it work, as in produce net energy?
Net energy is easy. Just build it larger or make the magnets insanely strong.
The problem is keeping the whole set-up in operation 24/7 for years and years.
That's where most of the engineering hurdles still lie.

>>8641970
Hey guys, I found the entirety of Reddit as one comment.

I still thin harnessing the earths capacitance is the way to go. Someone said something about this affecting the ionosphere and magnetosphere, but both these are a product of our molten core, and the charge is just plasmids trapped in the ionosphere emmited by the sun, so no effecting the magnetosphere or the ionosphere. All that's needed is a network of resonators to act as a supply for primary winding(note that you will need a charge to start this process that or well designed superconductors, something that will oscillate on the same frequency as the source you wish to draw from) and a stepdown circuit coupled with a relitivly wound second winding to bring this charge down to a useful measure, or alternitavly adapt technology to take a much greater current.( with enough reaserch and experimentation into this one could create a small aerial wound from a superconductive material coupled with a well designed transformer to take the place of batteies)


>Harnessing energy through means of induction.
What is this the 19th century or something. You want to work in parallel with existing circuits not outside, and this is why most green energy sources are doomed from the beginning, because we are using artificial methods of induction on earths capacitance and as for fossil fuels this uses methods of 'natural induction' artificially boosted, through processes that would otherwise naturally radiate and disserpate the energy.

Harnessing the energy from the rotation of the Earth.

>>8642980
but that would slow the earth down

>>8641764
Realising that it will be a mixture. Long distance supranational power grids.

Why aren't we using geothermal energy centrals? There are hard enough metals to withstand the temperature of the magma, if they can withstand the temperatures in the nuclear plant where the uranium sticks meet.

>>8642985
Even slowing it down by just one second off the day would yield a huge, huge amount of energy.

>>8642980
How is that gonna work?

Imma conservative alt-rightist so I want the most dirty, harmful, and least efficient form of energy! Fuck the Earth!

>>8643001
>Imma american so I want the most dirty, harmful, and least efficient form of energy! Fuck the Earth!
Fixed.

File: earth sping as energy.png (4KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 800x600px

>>8642998
Interesting challenge. You'd need something independent of the Earth's rotation to start, something on the pole that is hovering perhaps, or maybe a gyroscope of some kind. but let's start with something hovering, because it's cooler, perhaps a superconductor magnet.

Then you'd tie a rope from the hovering object to a stationary point on the earth. As it spun there would have to be some sort of generator in the hovering object that would convert that pull into energy without spinning the hovering object along with it

>>8643025
Not a bad idea, but won't the constant gravity pull fuck with the mechanical gains? I mean the spin isn't fast enough to produce any meaningful mechanical gain, I think it would be better to somehow get the device to move counter the earth's direction through space, but that seems impossible.

File: earth sping as energy 2.gif (642KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 300x300px

>>8643048
The gravity shouldn't affect it as long as its hovering due to a superconductor magnet, or more realistically, it is inside of a gyroscope.

Dyson spheres

File: earth sping as energy 3.png (97KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1500x1000px

>>8643025
>>8643060
Here is what the final product might look like

File: 1484177521302.jpg (36KB, 600x669px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x669px

>>8641764
the power of memes

>>8642166
>How about finding a catalytic way to regenerate fuel from CO2 using solar energy
I think the most elegant way to do it would be implement (something) into GMO crops instead of RUBISCO

File: 1987_CPA_5892.jpg (109KB, 560x800px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 560x800px

>>8641764
Energy from the heat of the Earth's mantle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Continental_Deep_Drilling_Programme

This reached the depth of 9,101 metres and had to stop due to it reaching temperatures of 250C. The issue of time and safety wouldn't be ambitious due to the 2008 ERD well BD-04A being able to drill 12,290 metres in just 36 days with no incidents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Shaheen_Oil_Field#History)

Only a fraction of the depth is needed to reach temperature usable for energy production, also we would only need to drill one hole and just expand the room at the other end.

>>8643134
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland_Deep_Drilling_Project


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole
>The deepest, SG-3, reached 12,262 metres (40,230 ft) in 1989 and still is the deepest artificial point on Earth
>because of higher-than-expected temperatures at this depth and location, 180 °C (356 °F) instead of expected 100 °C (212 °F), drilling deeper was deemed infeasible and the drilling was stopped in 1992.[5] With the projected further increase in temperature with increasing depth, drilling to 15,000 m (49,000 ft) would have meant working at a temperature of 300 °C (570 °F), where the drill bit would no longer work.

>>8643134
>>8643156
Why don't we do this anymore?

>>8643160
I don't wanna bring /pol/ into this but I'm seriously gonna say Schlomo. Geothermal energy can be used for both electrical and heating purposes, it can be accessed anywhere on the globe and we definitely have the technology to build it right now.

But that would put the fossil fuel magnate Schlomo out of business of course.

>>8643178
What can I do with this info?

>>8643134
What if we control volcanoes? Get energy and prevent dangerous eruptions.

>>8643178
>can be accessed those few places around the globe where sufficient heat circulates close enough to the surface to make exploitation economically feasible and is replenished fast enough to avoid the localized cooling issues that creep in when you draw off heat for power.

>>8641764
Photophosphorylation
Anything else is a fucking joke.

>>8643187
Of course! How simple.

>>8642169
>red pill meme originates from the matrix movies

You mean Charles Lutwidge Dodgson books.

>>8642073
I mean thorium seems to be a thing right now. It removes a lot of the "Bad Stuff" in fission power.

File: 1471025805785.jpg (52KB, 1280x544px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x544px

>>8643678
Also makes fission even less economically viable than it already is.

>>8643894
Thorium is much more prevalent in Earth's crust than Uranium. Thorium is cheaper for this reason.

>>8643894
>>8643976
Moreover, whereas uranium has to be painstakingly refined down to make usable fuel, Thorium just has to be placed in a neutron beam and 100% of it turns into fissile uranium - which also means that turning the neutron beam off kills the reaction, so it literally cannot melt down.

>>8642752
The second law of thermodynamics fucks you over, because low temperature heat engines are fucking inefficient. The best you could get from a person with a body temperature of 36 °C, assuming the outside temperature is 0 °C, is less than 12 %, theoretically, so it would be even worse in practice. Also, it is far cheaper to build some fucking bike generators than it is to build some ridiculous thermal generators.
But yeah, it is still a stupid concept, I think it wasn't meant to be viable anyway, it's just about how people are willing to betray their morals for a chance at a good life.

>>8643178
Realistically, schlomo would already be doing geothermal if it was that good. I mean, climate change is already an accepted concept, and some countries are already heavily subsidizing green energy and are thinking about a carbon tax, so the only reasonable thing to do is to invest your money in the next form of energy generation while it's cheap (government subsidies) to dominate the coming market.

>>8644002
How would you even create a steady beam of neutrons? How much energy would this take to make enough uranium to power an entire plant?

>>8643097
Plants are probably more inefficient though, you could probably get more fuel yield per square meter by using solar to turn CO2 from air and hydrogen from water into fuel.

>>8641764
Nuclear. Mass to energy bb. all other current forms are just energy manipulation and harnessing.

>>8644006
>The second law of thermodynamics fucks you over, because low temperature heat engines are fucking inefficient. The best you could get from a person with a body temperature of 36 °C, assuming the outside temperature is 0 °C, is less than 12 %, theoretically, so it would be even worse in practice.
Yeah, but a human gives you around 100W thermal all the time, bikes are similarly inefficient and give you 100W for maybe quarter of the day.
>Also, it is far cheaper to build some fucking bike generators than it is to build some ridiculous thermal generators.
You think? I was thinking more something like using air heated around them instead of literally hooking people up. A properly insulated, airtight building with 100 people should give you 10kW thermal, with maybe 10% efficiency so 24kWh/day, vs bikes 6h/day*30W*100= 18kWh. It's still impractical as fuck, but maybe more efficient since it can be centralised instead having shitton of bikes.
>But yeah, it is still a stupid concept, I think it wasn't meant to be viable anyway, it's just about how people are willing to betray their morals for a chance at a good life.
Yeah, it just triggers my autism. I mean they obviously have a lot of energy, maybe it's sorta concept of people doing at least something with their pathetic lives.

How is a form of energy production 'redpilled'?

>>8644245
Wiki says cyclists use about 60 watts of power while cycling (and it seems to me that this is actual mechanical power, and not calories), and says the mechanical losses an a bicycle are a few percent at best, so you could reasonably expect to generate an average of at least 50 watts per cyclist, factoring in generator efficiency, I mean they are well fed, and are rewarded or punished based on their performance. Also, my 0 °C assumption was based on a cold climate. If they live in a warm climate then the best they could do is dissipate the heat into the ground, or a nearby river, which is, let's assume, 10 °C. There's also the psychological aspect of just locking people in a complex and using their heat vs. making them generate power, thus giving them a purpose. I guess the best would be to use both cycling and thermal, but cycling would be necessary for the reasons I mentioned above.
Btw the whole cycling thing might have been chosen to be stupid on purpose, i.e. the people are controlled by locking them into a building and making them do a futile task every day (the fucking screens alone use more electricity than you can generate by cycling).

>>8643219
>avoid the localized cooling issues

This is the real reason... Earth is NOT a good heat conductor... eventually you will deplete all the local heat/energy.

nuclear, in addition to being black magic to the uninformed, also has the advantage of being extremely practical and working with already existing infrastructure. while nuclear is not the ideal solution to forever solve the energy crisis it currently is the best way to stop the damage quickly while a more permanent solution is worked out, which could possibly include something like >>8641810 mentioned that would change lots of shit up.

Praying to jesus for energy

>>8644023
It is inefficient in many ways but has the advantage that it scales up vastly and easily.

>>8642194
>>8641978
You mean biochemists

>>8641764
A combination. Methanol from garbage and compost. Solar panels, and efficient wind turbines. Not the giant current ones.
Also rain barrels for water, introduce into a closed still with a turbine. Use natural gas from methanol production to heat.

>>8644358
A higher figure for atmospheric carbon absorption of plants per acre per year (trees, to be specific, they're pretty good at it) is about 5 metric tons/acre/year, which amounts to about 1.24 kg/square meter/year. Gasoline contains carbon and hydrogen in a 12:2.something ratio by weight, so let's be generous say you can produce 1.54 kilograms of gasoline/square meter/year. I liter of gasoline contains 46.7 megajoules of energy, so you produce 72 megajoules/square meter/year. The world's estimated total power consumption in 2012 was 104426 TWh, meaning an average power of around 11 terawatts. If you calculate the landmass needed to create all the fuel we need to cover that, you'd get around 510 million square kilometres, so almost exactly the entire surface of the planet, including the oceans. If you only want to create gasoline for cars, you'd need to cover only about 1/5 of the Earth's surface, not to mention the increasing demand for cars in developing countries. Point is, plants are fucking inefficient, so you'd need some ridiculous improvements in the carbon absorbing capability of a plant to actually produce fuel in meaningful quantities. Also, solar fuel generation would scale just as well, for example, if you had an array of smaller fuel plants that cover, let's say, an acre, you could just build a ton of those next to each other, and it seems more technologically feasible at this point too.

File: jimmy page.jpg (330KB, 842x842px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 842x842px

>>8641810

That's Jimmy Page you fucking nutjob

>solar rooftops
>retarded middle class drowned in class privilege shits think everyone can afford solar fucking tiles because their mom and dad can

I hate those trendy eco-lifestylers so goddam much.

>>8644502
Although, afaik we've never seriously worked on that aside from food crops. We've never specifically bred a plant for carbon capture so there might be quite some room for improvement, although I do agree that in principle plants are a shitty way of doing it.

We just need a safe and very cheap nuclear energy source. Just imagine what we could do with 1¢/MWh prices; ridiculously cheap desalination and enormous hydroponic food production facilities.

>>8644502
For some plants, like canola, you press the oil for fuel/food/etc and the remains can be used to feed animals so you have the advantage of dual use.

>>8642350
>they're full retard

Not him, but I'm intrigued. What makes them so bad in your opinion?

>>8644624
I don't think the prices would drop that much, since part of the costs goes to infrastructure maintenance. Of course, desalination plants could have their own power plants where there's enough demand for it, which would get rid of the powerline maintenance costs.

>>8642371
They could've grabbed onto a wing and moved a little out, would've survived. Why are engineers manlets?

File: AAEAAQAAAAAAAAdVAAAAJGQxZjkyNzRjLThiYzAtNDYwNC1hY2ViLWFiNTc1ZmQ0YTk1ZA[1].png (108KB, 796x677px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 796x677px

All of this is just patchwork until fusion comes along.

>hurr durr 30 year away

There has been a recent breakthrough in superconducting materials, which enables you to run at a higher magnetic field to confine and compress the plasma. This creates a ripple effect down the design which means that you can build a much smaller reactor with the same output and efficiency.

ITER is basically a dead end since it's way too big to ever become commercial viable, it;ll never be able to produce power at a price competing with fossil fuels or other renewables.

Just watch this video, the guy does a great job of explaining the basics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4

>>8642031
Life goals

>>8641764
Niggers on treadmills

>>8644013
shlomo is about monopoly and control, not efficiency and feasibility

>>8644822
That's exactly what I'm saying, he will lose his monopoly if he doesn't get with the times.

>>8641810
>i just solved all energy and pollution issues

Good luck on mining all the selenium, gallium, and cadmium while creating 0 pollution. Also, have fun finding a way to process all the carbon tetrafluoride and silicon trichloride created in the process. Finally, let me know when you find a way to safely dispose of these materials when the solar panels die.

You are a retard, and anyone else toting 100% solar-reliance is also a retard.

>>8641764
>Most redpilled today
Nuclear.
>Most redpilled in the future
Either cold fusion, or hydrogen-generating photosynthetic microsystems implanted into panels.

>>8642613
you convert the algae into biofuel pellets or alcohol

File: 1485977651076.jpg (39KB, 244x287px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 244x287px

>>8642613
You do that regardless so it's irrelevant. With increasing efficiency you'll hopefully end up with a higher yield where the whole process is actually worth it.
>>8644470
Not much of a differenc between microbio and biochem nowadays

>>8644672
For industry it would be a huge drop. You could build a 10GW plant in the bumfuck nowhere and it would create an industrial city around it. It could power 50 steel mills.

Infrastructure costs aren't that important at small distances, you could probably make a superconducting ring that goes through the city with minimal losses, but I think even conventional transport would work.

What fascinates me the most is that a really large power plant could recover thousands of kilometers of desert. In an alternative reality in which aussies weren't deathly afraid of nuclear they could transform it all into fertile land. If this ever happens you can count on Saudi Arabia reclaiming huge percentage of their backwards desert. A 10 GW electrical plant, using 3kWh/m3 desalination energy and assuming 1m of water per m2 of surface per year, you get 30,000 km2 reclaimed, not even taking into account 20GW wasted thermal energy. Everything within 100km of the coast could be jungle. Same thing with California, a couple of plants this size could completely solve all of their water problems. Same thing with Mexico. Same thing with every country in middle east.

>>8641764
nuclear fusion, antimatter

>>8641764
More clever ways to turn cranks and pedals into stored energy. Springs and nano-gears.

>>8641764
Tax carbon and let the free market decide.

>>8641764
Solar is great in very specific situations. Wind is really nice but the upkeep costs for an individual turbine is just too high to be practical on a large scale.

Nuclear power, fission or pure germanic fusion, is really the best for extreme power consumption areas.

Hydro power is probably at its best when it's done for less population-dense places like WA where the energy surplus and upkeep for nuclear wouldn't be sustainable.

But you want to know what the really really real future is?

When we stop letting Michio Kaku trick normies into believing his bullshit.

>>8642166

Yeah, see, this is the real problem.

We need something that can be transported in a realistic way.

Electricity and battery tech is fine for most things, but what about large freighters and planes?

How can we find something so energy dense and portable?

Does anyone know? Could nuclear replace crude oil on freighters? Is there any alternative that could fuel jets?

>>8644885

I was a fan of Tesla before it became popular or widely recognized.

When I shared the name of the car with my friend, however, he was making similar arguments as you against Tesla.

And now suddenly it became popular. Do you think Tesla is a mistake? Do you think battery tech is more harmful than gasoline?

If you think Tesla is not a mistake, then what makes solar different?

>>8646400
For the foreseeable future we can just keep using fossil fuels. If we can generate the rest of the energy the world consumes in some other way what's irreplaceable can easily still be satisfied by fossil fuels or chemical fuels.

>>8644679
>survived
>>8644709
Wow, this is harsh! I wonder if a helicopter couldn't have been sent there to rescue those poor guys. The turbines seem to be still for them to be standing so close to them

>>8646400
>Does anyone know? Could nuclear replace crude oil on freighters? Is there any alternative that could fuel jets?
Realistically? No. It's too much of a risk, navy nuclear fleet works because it's the fucking navy. Imagine third world niggers having a fleet of nuclear powered cargo ships and deciding to cut costs on maintenance. I'm the first to be libertarian and shit, but giving nuclear to normies and retards is giving a machine gun to a chimp.

What can actually work assuming (((renewables))) drop $/kWh another order of magnitude or two, or we finally start building cheap large scale nuclear is synthesising hydrocarbons. They are perfect, really, very energy dense, relatively safe, and easy and fast to refuel anywhere in the world. You can even appease the greenfag by being ultra wasteful and source the carbon from biomass or, God forbid, air so it's carbon neutral. Combined with a oil price rise, this could be quite plausible state of affairs in couple of decades.

What's most interesting is that if gas powered cars stay alive until then, there won't be any real reason to switch to electrical.

File: 1484064406088.jpg (154KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1000x1000px

>>8641764
Nuclear is the only redpilled form of energy

>>8646829
>babby first energy

NUKULER

PAUER

>>8642371
>put some anchor points around the top
>put a ladder that goes halfway up the mast
>rope down to the ladder
>niggas be safe

>>8644595
Solar systems really aren't that expensive.

>>8644885
>Also, have fun finding a way to process all the carbon tetrafluoride and silicon trichloride created in the process

you mean the stuff that's already created through other industrial processes?

File: v98eI.jpg (30KB, 562x239px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 562x239px

>>8641764

>>8642350
The only reason fossils outperform wind is because you don't pay for the environmental degradation caused by burning them.

Even so, in the right locations wind can be cost effective.

Nuclear is the clear redpill
The effiecienty is amazing
Only problem is storing the wastes but if we put our minds to it we could easily solve that problem.

>>8647066
Decommissioning the hot core from a closed down reactor is a huge problem and also expensive.

>>8643025
>>8643048
>>8643060
>>8643070
Would submerging it in a giant pool of water also work to make it independent of the earth's spin? Any science bros want to answer?

>>8647047
underrated toast

File: 3060082_1_1.1000x1000.jpg (292KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1000x1000px

I used to think radiometers were a good idea but I realized they wouldn't be good for generating lots of energy.

>>8641859
this guy has it

>>8644885
I love you

>>8642334
1: Go to site of nuclear testing that is already radioactive.
2: Pile up your nuclear waste.
3: Put up fence.
4: Sign on fence, "If you cross this fence you will die."
5: Anybody crosses fence, average intelligence of humanity rises slightly.
6: ?????
7: EVOLUTION!

>>8642985
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoXPuOeDqaE

>>8643025
Somehow I suspect laws of thermodynamics are going to fuck this up.

>>8641764
Fossil fuels are the ultimate redpill, there are enough available to last for hundreds of years and they are infinitely superior to other forms of energy, global warming is a lie manufactured to justify higher taxes and fund leftist organizations, as long as basic pollution management precautions are taken to avoid China conditions and the fuel is sourced in the US, Canada or Russia instead of unstable middle eastern kingdoms there is literally no drawback.

>>8643134
How fast will the drill hole area cool below usable temperatures as energy is drained off?

>>8644298
Other than those few areas where a shit-ton of heat is being carried up near the surface by magma an shit, replenishing what's drawn off.

>>8647036
That would likely depend on the number of planets and stuff.

>>8647219
What if a bunch of dummies tie up a smart person and throw them in there???

>>8641764
Nuclear

>>8647281
Smart people should not get tricked by a bunch of dummies like that.

>>8647292
nuclear is the ultimate blue pill dude

>>8647036
>400$ per MWh
I hate you so fucking much

>>8647331
>shitposting about the cleanest, safest most abundant energy source in the world
Reeeeeeee

>>8647299
Would they even need to be tricked though? They could be physically forced.

>>8647378
>tfw too smart to be physically forced

File: earth sping as energy 4.png (31KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 800x600px

>>8647133
I made this

>>8647231
Source: my ass

>>8647219
If you don't cross the fence you die also.

Starring at the sun is the best energy production redpill.

>>8642752
Gotta give them something to do so they don't go crazy. I wouldn't be surprised if the writers secretly set it up so that the buildings actually power themselves.