Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: OWS Install Solar Panels America's Homes: We Need Sustainable Energy Now: Oil Crisis Iminent

Posted 1 year ago on Aug. 12, 2012, 2:05 p.m. EST by gsw (2603)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

To get our message out to the people, we should initiate a project to install Solar Panels on the homes of progressives, who are sympathetic to OWS issues.

To pay for this, the initial savings of energy would go into a fund, until the solar panels were paid off. (If this was a non-profit enterprise, could this work practically and economically, if OWS sympathizers volunteered their ___ hours a week working on this effort, and show the world OWS has solutions to complex real world problems)

We need leadership and a national energy policy. The pols will do what the energy industry tells them, which will not be enough to meet the challenges of energy, and we must start thinking of ways to get alternative energy directly to consumers, bypassing traditional corporations.

OWS should help lead an effort to install solar panels on the roofs of their members homes, to shed light on this problem, that the current political and economic system is not capable of working to solve real world problems in a long term approach.

Is the era of oil nearing its end? By GREG GORDON

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947905_p2/is-the-era-of-oil-nearing-its.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

The world must accept "the outlook for flattened oil supplies" and "the reality that the era of abundant cheap oil is over," said Sadad Al Husseini, a former No. 2 executive for Saudi Arabia's national oil company, Aramco. In emails to McClatchy, he called for worldwide energy conservation measures.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration's deputy chief, Henry Gruenspecht, defended his agency's main global oil supply forecast as stemming from "careful consideration of a wide range of factors." He noted, however, that there's "significant uncertainty" about future supply and demand of liquid fuels and a lack of transparency regarding some nations' reserves.

An international group of scientists and energy experts argue that global oil production has peaked or soon will as the second half of the oil age begins. The experts, known as peak oil advocates, say that the output of 500 existing giant oilfields that provide most of the world's liquid fuels has begun a gradual decline that will create a 17 million-barrel daily deficit by 2035.

If they're right, and if the Energy Information Administration has accurately projected future demand, liquid fuels production must fill a daunting, 38.6 million-barrel daily void to keep pace - an amount equal to more than 40 percent of the current global output.

"We're facing a situation that is real hard for anyone to grasp," said Kjell Aleklett, the Swedish president of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947905_p2/is-the-era-of-oil-nearing-its.html#storylink=cpy

Professor sees energy 'trap' ahead By GREG GORDON McClatchy Newspapers

Related Content

* <http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/>)
* <http://bit.ly/PEdrgn>)

By GREG GORDON

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947907/professor-sees-energy-trap-ahead.html#storylink=cpy http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947905_p2/is-the-era-of-oil-nearing-its.html

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947907/professor-sees-energy-trap-ahead.html

Tom Murphy, an associate physics professor at the University of California, San Diego, likes to compute big and daunting numbers.

So when he grew concerned about how the nation could sustain its spiraling energy consumption, he decided to chart the use of fuel alongside the estimated U.S. gross domestic product since the year 1650 (http://bit.ly/PEdrgn).

That led him to the alarming realization that exponential economic growth cannot continue into the decades and centuries ahead because of constraints on energy supplies, said Murphy, whose website is named Do the Math: Using physics and estimation to assess energy, growth, options (http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/).

One way to understand the crucial role of energy in today's world is to see what happens if it's unavailable.

People might think that, because energy costs comprise a little over 10 percent of the economy, a 10 percent cut in energy availability would be relatively harmless, amounting to a 1 percent impact.

However, that energy enables so many things that in a severe energy crunch, "you're going to see something larger" - a sort of multiplier effect on the economy, Murphy said.

Murphy said he believes that the world is "approaching a trap," with energy supplies unable to keep up with demand and creating a need to divert some precious energy for use in developing alternatives, such as tens of millions of fuel-efficient cars and new forms of renewable energy sources, he said.

That, in turn, could create a new problem.

"If things happen the way they typically have, where high oil prices trigger recession, who's going to buy these expensive electric cars?" he asked.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/12/2947907/professor-sees-energy-trap-ahead.html#storylink=cpy

15 Comments

15 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by kaiserw (211) 1 year ago

Nuclear power is the only option for clean energy, Thorium reactors are the most promising and safest option, and they can burn up all the unused fuel waste we have sitting around everywhere. thoriumenergyalliance.com

"renewables" are a no-go from the beginning, they cause grid havoc, (non-stable production rates) and the simply do not produce enough power per acre/dollar invested.

[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 1 year ago

While solar energy is abundant it is highly unreliable. While it is good for short term energy we need nuclear power for the long term.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2603) 1 year ago

If we could combine solar or wind with burning of salt water, wouldn't that be easier, cleaner than nuclear.

Possible Energy Source: Burning Seawater

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-205_162-3246430.html

You use energy to break the saltwater's chemical bond, but this could be from a renewable energy source.

http://www.ecogeek.org/weird-stuff/951

So what if it takes more energy in than what comes out of the process? The energy in can come from renewable sources that can not be stored, i.e. Sunlight or wind energy, to Hydrogen that can be stored for when there is no sunlight or wind. Using the world's oceans as the raw material for creating Hydrogen from sunlight sounds like a win to me. Power input is not an issue. He is not claiming a perpetual motion machine or cold fusion..... "mike"

[-] 0 points by Clancy (42) 1 year ago

They don't know a whole lot about the salt water idea though. It's to early on to know whether or not it will work on a large scale. Nuclear produces huge amounts of electricity and the disposal of the spent rods isn't that hard.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Lie - disposal of spent rods is a huge and growing problem - called nuclear waste storage.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITY (23) 1 year ago

If enough people agree that Debt Neutrality would free up anywhere from 300 million to 1 billion dollars A DAY that are presently going to starving bankers in the form of daily interest rate charges on 2-3 trillion dollars of consumer debt, that is a huge wad of money that could be going towards 10,000 dollar grants for wind and solar energy designs for the backyard or apartment.

One billion dollars A DAY worth of pointless interest rate charges on existing credit card and student loan debt could fund 100,000 projects per day with a 10,000 dollar budget for each project.

Holy moly!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You should actually present this idea to Habitat for Humanity. Maybe include geo-thermal heating and cooling to your pitch. See also the Hopewell Project. This could be a government funded stimulus as well.

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 1 year ago

So far Gov subsidies for domestic solar power has really done nothing to curb climate change, but sure has lined the pockets of the 1 % (both consumers and suppliers):

http://www.science20.com/science_20/blog/1_love_solar_subsidies_paid_other_99-84097

http://toryaardvark.com/2012/05/08/the-sun-sets-on-britains-solar-subsidy-boondoggle/

http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/04/23/solar-subsidies/

[-] 2 points by gsw (2603) 1 year ago

I wish there was a cooperative that individuals could tap in to for not for profit solar for their home use.

I don't know if govn't would need to be involved, but if one could get an efficient solar system at no mark up, why not.

I think many Americans would donate time to this project to construct solar panels, to work towards greater energy independence and sustainable energy use. High School Kids, who need community service hours to graduate, could put in a little time.

Every little bit helps.

My clothes dryer has bit the dust after 24 years, and using a clothes line, makes a huge reduction in my electric costs.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 1 year ago

I never stopped using a cloths line. I must confess that for me it is less about the environmental issue and more about just being cheap! (My Mom used to hang out cloths in winter. I remember bringing them in off the line frozen solid).

[-] 0 points by Abby100 (-54) 1 year ago

We should tax anyone making over $100,000.00 a year at the 95%. If you make over 100k everything should be taxed @95%.

[-] 2 points by vitvitvit (5) 1 year ago

So people should work 95% of their lives for someone else?

Brilliant !

[-] 1 points by Abby100 (-54) 1 year ago

No if you make over $100k a year everything over 100k should be taxed at 95% so we can provide for the less fortunate.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2603) 1 year ago

put the figure at $400,000.00 and 90 percent, till the deficit is paid off, any way, since the so many are concerned about it all of a sudden.

Everyone pay the current rates up to $250,00 a year above that 50 to 89 percent up to $400,00 and above.

the rich need some money to live on, so they whine. They're the biggest whiners I've noticed.

We would also need to cut about 25 percent military spending.

oops, i'm way off topic.

HOW About wind energy, my state WA has a bit of that, but my place is not very windy at my house.

I do get rainfall.

could I get energy from rain going down my gutters, mini water-wheels, (and save the rain water, in fall winter spring), and also solar.

[-] 1 points by vitvitvit (5) 1 year ago

Sounds idiotic. Everyone working for $99,900 or outsourcing themselves overseas.

The iron fist of tyrannical gubment doesn't work. It never has.

Stop constantly trying to make your problems everyone's problems.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by miledan (-1) 1 year ago

You will never get any of the ows loons off the couch to do anything. Us taxpayers are supporting the majority of them all, right now. Oil and coal are the only energy solutions right now, so drill and keep digging