Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Public Ownership Of Renewable Energy

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 26, 2012, 10:03 a.m. EST by bullfrogma (448)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

This is a post taken from the AnonNews.org forum. It sounds pretty damn good. Sorry if this has already come up here. Wondering what people can say and share about it.

"Most of Americas and Worlds Problems Adressed By A Single Policy: Public Ownership of Renewable Energy Utilities."

America is addicted to Oil.America is in debt. Global climate Change is getting worse and poses a substantive threat to many industries such as insurance, agriculture and forrestry to name a few.Peak OIL poses a serious threat to stability of the economy as a whole.National debt is often cited as a major concern. War and security concerns have drained the taxpayer and lessened Liberty feeding into a Police state,Security, Prison, Military Industrial complex of the type Truman and Orwell warned us about.Even though we as individuals and a nation cant afford it we still fork over to the Saudi Family for instance one Billion dollars a day.Even though we as individuals and as a nation cant afford it we still spend 580 Billion dollars in defense spending every year. Tanks , guns and planes dont offer a benefit or return to the taxpayer or increase security and liberty. Quite the opposite. What this spending is is what the Republicans always complain loudest about, Big Government. This excessive defense spending is in fact a form of hidden oil subsudy , a form of taxpayer draining corporate welfare that offers the taxpayer no return on their investment. Free security for Oil firms who are big boys now and can afford to pay for their own security.Tactically and strategically speaking having supply lines that span half the world is foolhardy and unsound as well as expensive to secure. Maintaining expensive bases near the oil is counter to positive diplomacy to say the least. In fact their very presence is a barrier to positive diplomacy.The single largest consumer of petroleum in the world is the US military. The analogy could be made to the woman who spends all her money on crack cokaine instead of filling the cupboards with staple foods for her children or investing in education and attending rehab to better her situation. I guess you could blame the pusher who seems to smell money and comes around like clockwork. Up until a few years ago we had a Whitehouse full of them. We have other problems of course like the damage to groundwater aquifirs from natural gas fracking Halliburton is an example . They have a special exemption from the clean drinking water act.These problems can all be addressed by a single policy. Public ownership of renewable energy utilities. Contrary to the tax and liberty draining sinkhole of oil addiction, renewable energy utilities actually make money. The fuel is free , you do the math. Other nations have. Of course its possible . we went to the moon, and we committed to that when the technologies didn t even exist. These are well established technologies that pay for themselves in short order and address all the aforementioned problems and more.Enough solar thermal power generation in the southwest could power the entire nations energy needs for all applications includuing transportation seven times over. Now thats just solar thermal and thats just the potential of the southwest. When you add photovoltaics to that, and solar hotwater heating, as well as geothermal, biodeisel from algae and other sources, wind ,tidal, wave motion, offshore wind, conservation and efficiency, including electric high speed rail, hybrid and electric cars. This policy of public ownership of renewable energy utilities represents the economic, social, environmental , diplomatic and security win win win win win for America.

17 Comments

17 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 1 year ago

"Public Ownership Of Renewable Energy" - That just warrants repeating in and of itself !!!

Thanx for this great forum-post', further to which, I append :

fiat lux ...

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 2 years ago

At a minimum we should find a way to put enough solar panels on government buildings to power themselves when the sun is out. Depending on how cost effective it is they might not do it right away but they can get started and build up steam when they get the details down. They can require the utilities to buy up a modest amount of the excess and cut down on coal or oil which ever is easiest to shut down during peak hours but they should build a surplus, not that they would be close to that problem any time soon.

They should also get involved in wind when possible. they would save money in health care since it would lead to less pollution so this would offset the costs.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

The take-up of domestic solar installations in Australia has created an unforseen problem of over-supply of feed-in power upsetting the grid.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/carbon-tax/rooftop-solar-panels-overloading-electricity-grid/story-fn99tjf2-1226165360822

THE runaway take-up of rooftop solar panels is undermining the quality of electricity supplies, feeding so much power back into the network that it is stressing the system and causing voltage rises that could damage household devices such as computers and televisions.

Power distribution lines and home wiring were designed for electricity to flow from power stations to appliances, but households with solar panels do the reverse of this.

One of Australia's biggest electricity network providers, Ausgrid, yesterday warned that there was a "significant likelihood" that costs would have to rise because of the impact of the solar photovoltaic cells.

In a letter to the NSW pricing regulator, obtained by The Australian, Ausgrid warns that in areas with a high concentration of solar cells, voltage levels can rise and this can have "consequences for appliances and equipment in customers' homes". It can also cause solar systems to switch off.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (25072) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Too much of a good thing? Sounds like any system under change - that issues will arise and need to be addressed - like upgrading an old and perhaps fragile power grid. Sounds like a buffer could be used. Buffers have been needed anyway due to power surges and power drains due to volume of traffic/use on the grid. Rolling Brown outs or Black outs due to high demand for say AC in hot times.

A liquid metal battery has been suggested as a good interface and buffer between varied supply sources of electricity = Power Plant input with solar panel input with wind turbine input. The battery acts as a transfer point ( also as storage ) - this buffers the system/grid as the battery levels the power input and regulates the draw on the system/grid as well - surges go direct to the battery and output remains stable - a heavy draw on the system will 1st pull reserve energy from the battery - making for a smooth increase in the draw on power supply inputs.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

That would be the logical way, to my mind. The Ambri battery, hopefully not too expensive, would enable individual dwellings to cut the umbilical cord, and go it alone.

We have twenty-two panels, which is pretty-much the upper limit for a residential installation, and the tech guy said to do most of our power-hungry usage at night, because our feed-in tarrif was 55 cents a kw, and our usage tarrif was 18 cents, or there-abouts.

The gov had quite a generous subsidy package happening for domestic solar installations, giving back something in the order of 60% of the purchase price.

Maybe someone didn't do their maths, regarding the feed-in issues.

I'm off the grid myself, and that should be the goal of everyone, in my book. Even if you have to install a tiny diesel genset, running off hempseed/linseed oil, to get you through the rainy periods. What the gov needs to look at, is funding a gel-acid battery deal for consumers, rather than looking at upgrading old power lines.

[-] 2 points by bullfrogma (448) 2 years ago

I really like the idea of not having a grid. When that alien battleship starts firing harmonic torpedos, we wont loose every facility at once like a string of christmas lights.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Yes, and I don't like the idea of a controlled drinking water supply. I'm against plastic bottled water, but if I have to drink tapwater, I boil it, and let it cool overnight.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (25072) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I do not know about gel-acid batteries - But I do believe it would be awesome if everyone was off of the grid. Just think of the industry in home power equipment and maintenance that could create. Major power plants could be incorporated for industrial and city needs - and when I say major power plants - I am thinking along the lines of thorium reactors ( about 1/10 of the footprint for a uranium reactor and much much cleaner as well as much safer ) or power plants that run off of landfill or sewer gasses ( methane - naturally occurring - not mined ).

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Gel-acid is the same as your standard car battery, without the maintenance issues, and they are deep-cycle, which means you can drain them repeatedly, without damaging the life of the battery.

I'll have to read up on those thorium reactors. After what happened in Japan recently, with caesium being detected in sea creatures hundreds of miles away, I find it hard to conceive anyone supporting more nuclear plants.

We already have a few of those methane collectors on old landfill rubbish dumps. Pretty sure it's still in the testing stages though.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (25072) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

There is a power plant ( new ) opened in Orange County Californica that operates off of sewer gas it also can produce hydrogen as part of it's normal operation.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

That's great. It all helps to get off the usual supply for power gen.

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 2 years ago

Actually I checked into this for one reason or another in the eighties; and at that time utilities were already required to buy power from clean energy sources or any source if it was approved by the regulatory agency although it might not be much money they paid for it. this wasn't causing a problem at the time despite all the claims that regulation was hurting us. They're designed to go either way as i found out when I asked about it that is the nature of AC. I don't know if this is still the case after deregulation or not.

As for the overload I actually covered that in my post by saying that they shouldn't produce much if any more power than they use and that the utilities could adjust with plants that can be shut down easy which is also already being done. This story about Australia sounds like it might be poor planning but it would be better than the problems we have here which are much worse.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 2 years ago

What struck me a lot was the military bases near oil being a barrier to positive diplomacy. Lets rape the whole world. And the example of our people in power being so irresponsible with our livelihood.

"This excessive defense spending is in fact a form of hidden oil subsudy , a form of taxpayer draining corporate welfare that offers the taxpayer no return on their investment."

"The analogy could be made to the woman who spends all her money on crack cokaine instead of filling the cupboards with staple foods for her children or investing in education."

"renewable energy utilities actually make money. The fuel is free , you do the math ... we went to the moon, and we committed to that when the technologies didn t even exist."

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 2 years ago

Conserve energy put the military out of business? Well maybe not quite that simple but it sounds good anyway and it could be part of the solution.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 2 years ago

I think it's talking about the excessive military spending that goes towards the hoarding of oil in other countries, stepping on toes. We are such an asshole, that needy, self-centered guy with no respect or concern for the arounding world.

Oil sucks, it really is like cocaine, easy, quick, strong, and not good. I just like the thought doing something better. But that real win win win is replacing money in the government with common sense, everything else will follow, or should.

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 1 year ago

FWIW The excessive military spending is also a result of paranoia that starts in early childhood violence and the lack of coverage for alternative views that the corporate media provides.

Also we need to do a lot more to conserve energy that is the most effective way to reduce oil consumption.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 1 year ago

Aye. I know this guy who used to ride his bike everywhere. Then he got a car and now all he does is drive, even if it's for only two blocks. Hasn't touched his bike for like two years. Totally addicted to effortless push of a button, and he complains about not feeling good.