JerryBaumchen 1,468 #1 Posted July 22 Hi folks, There is a whole lot of talk going on about just what our energy future is to look like. Some people want only 'Green' energy. Others want nuclear. I am completely opposed to nuclear because we cannot deal with the waste; and, I do not want to leave it for my grandchildren to deal with. Here is one excellent example supporting my position: WWII atomic waste contaminated a Missouri creek. People nearby had more cancer risk : Shots - Health News : NPR Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,185 #2 July 22 The future of energy is renewable energy. "https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/16/climate/china-us-wind-solar-energy-trumpChina installed more wind and solar power in a single year than the total amount of renewable energy currently operating in the United States." The current republican government has killed renewable clean energy. Its estimated that 21% of global energy demands will be consumed by data centres by 2030. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,590 #3 July 22 The real future should be figuring how to use less of it in the first place. Fewer and more efficient lights, appliances, smaller cars and more mass transit. Insulation. And that’s just individuals. There’s a reason the mantra starts with reduce Wendy P. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,468 #4 July 22 1 hour ago, Phil1111 said: The future of energy is renewable energy. "https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/16/climate/china-us-wind-solar-energy-trumpChina installed more wind and solar power in a single year than the total amount of renewable energy currently operating in the United States." The current republican government has killed renewable clean energy. Its estimated that 21% of global energy demands will be consumed by data centres by 2030. Hi Phil, IMO data centers are a plague on the states that have them. - They consume a LOT of electricity - They employ few workers - The pay is rather low - They always seem to be built out in fairly remote places where a lot of infrastructure has to be built to accommodate only them. Not much to really offer to taking all of that juice. Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,185 #5 July 22 45 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said: Hi Phil, IMO data centers are a plague on the states that have them. - They consume a LOT of electricity - They employ few workers - The pay is rather low - They always seem to be built out in fairly remote places where a lot of infrastructure has to be built to accommodate only them. Not much to really offer to taking all of that juice. Jerry Baumchen I agree with much of that but IMO the leverage they provide for labour and productivity more than pays for itself. The economics of positioning them in Arizona, Texas and dry sunbelt states is a mystery to me. I think they should be just south of the Quebec border to take advantage of cheap hydro-power. But thats likely above my pay grade. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #6 July 23 1 hour ago, wmw999 said: The real future should be figuring how to use less of it in the first place. Fewer and more efficient lights, appliances, smaller cars and more mass transit. Insulation. And far more efficient data centers. Right now performance per dollar is the metric; it should be performance per joule. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,468 #7 July 23 2 hours ago, wmw999 said: The real future should be figuring how to use less of it in the first place. Fewer and more efficient lights, appliances, smaller cars and more mass transit. Insulation. And that’s just individuals. There’s a reason the mantra starts with reduce Wendy P. Hi Wendy, I could not agree more; we must figure out how to use less of it in the first place. Re: Smaller cars I've been a car guy since I bought my first gas-powered vehicle in the summer of 1954. About 5 yrs ago, I was talking to my long-time auto mechanic just how could these small 4-cylinder engines could put out so much power. He said that advances in fuel injection was the primary reason. My first car was a 1947 Chevy with a 6-cylinder in-line engine - 216 cu inches/3.5l - 90 HP. Toyota's latest in-line 4-cylinder engines - 122 cu inches/2.0l - over 400 HP Toyota's New 2.0-Liter Turbo Engine Makes Big Power It is possible, Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JoeWeber 2,945 #8 July 23 Just now, billvon said: And far more efficient data centers. Right now performance per dollar is the metric; it should be performance per joule. How many newtons does it take to move one bitcoin one meter? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,185 #9 July 23 14 hours ago, wmw999 said: The real future should be figuring how to use less of it in the first place. Fewer and more efficient lights, appliances, smaller cars and more mass transit. Insulation. And that’s just individuals. There’s a reason the mantra starts with reduce Wendy P. 5-8 solar panels of 400 watts are needed to drive this car BYD Seagull(Caresoft You-Tube review) 60 km a day. Car costs $11,500 USD. Panels, EV battery storage, inverters, cost (Billvon pipe in here). Probably $25,000-$35,000 all in. Naturally republicans go for the $100,000 full load F-250 turbo diesel club cab truck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 900 #10 July 23 13 hours ago, JoeWeber said: How many newtons does it take to move one bitcoin one meter? router>test cable-diagnostics tdr Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
