B
Bret Cahill
Guest
Also consider conventionally [read: expensive] powered R. O. costs
several hundreds dollars/acre foot while many crops bring in at least
an order of magnitude more money / acre.
Bret Cahill
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
several hundreds dollars/acre foot while many crops bring in at least
an order of magnitude more money / acre.
Bret Cahill
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/3/2013 7:40 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Hydrogen from the water already in the aquifer and then make peak load
electricity with a hydrogen burning turbine electric generator?
You could make millions from a few hundred acres of otherwise marginally
productive land.
Wouldn't it make better economic sense to use wind and solar to makeIf the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
It's a great idea, but using these figures -http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm
and a melt rate of around 100 km3 per year, you'd need at least $210
billion just to build the desalination plants, let alone the PV plants.
All of the water doesn't have to be desalinated. In California it's
illegal to inject anything into the aquifer, however, in some places
the geo thermal brine is so toxic it might not be hard to get the
state to provide a varuience.
Consider that a acre foot of R.O. costs a few hundred dollars in
electricity at today's rates and an acre of berries and many other
crops can fetch $40,000.
Some farmer from Salinas was telling me farm land in Salinas _rents_
for $60,000 / acre - year. Maybe he meant a quarter square.
Hydrogen from the water already in the aquifer and then make peak load
electricity with a hydrogen burning turbine electric generator?
You could make millions from a few hundred acres of otherwise marginally
productive land.
J
josephus
Guest
Unum wrote:
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
josephus
its not bad as a quibble. if you pump sea water into the aquiferOn 1/2/2013 7:23 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Unum wrote:
On 1/2/2013 12:26 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.
Preserve usenet trolls in it?
Pickled trolls. Mmmmm
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
josephus
B
Bret Cahill
Guest
Too many unnecessary conversions and losses.If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
It's a great idea, but using these figures -http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm
and a melt rate of around 100 km3 per year, you'd need at least $210
billion just to build the desalination plants, let alone the PV plants..
All of the water doesn't have to be desalinated. In California it's
illegal to inject anything into the aquifer, however, in some places
the geo thermal brine is so toxic it might not be hard to get the
state to provide a varuience.
Consider that a acre foot of R.O. costs a few hundred dollars in
electricity at today's rates and an acre of berries and many other
crops can fetch $40,000.
Some farmer from Salinas was telling me farm land in Salinas _rents_
for $60,000 / acre - year. Maybe he meant a quarter square.
Wouldn't it make better economic sense to use wind and solar to make
Hydrogen from the water already in the aquifer and then make peak load
electricity with a hydrogen burning turbine electric generator?
If they can get the price down on batteries just go straight from
solar to the battery.
Bret Cahill
B
Bret Cahill
Guest
Leave it down there.if you pump sea water into the aquifer
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
A lot of ground water is toxic, Cd and other heavy metals.
Bret Cahill
Guest
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 10:26:50 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
mention the political storm any project causes.
<Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
panels and the infrastructure to make it viable would create, not toIf the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
mention the political storm any project causes.
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/4/2013 8:05 AM, default wrote:
they want it.
You can use nuclear for about $0.11 a watt right now.
Membrane for the R/O is NOT all that cheap and then all that health care
for the workers makes it cost several dollars a gallon to produce and
distribute purified water.
There would also be a dispute as to who owns that water in the aquifer.
it like Some rich people buy a yacht NOT because it's cheap but becauseOn Wed, 2 Jan 2013 10:26:50 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels and the infrastructure to make it viable would create, not to
mention the political storm any project causes.
The $0.60 a watt is prohibitive except fort doing because you want to do
they want it.
You can use nuclear for about $0.11 a watt right now.
Membrane for the R/O is NOT all that cheap and then all that health care
for the workers makes it cost several dollars a gallon to produce and
distribute purified water.
There would also be a dispute as to who owns that water in the aquifer.
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/4/2013 8:05 AM, default wrote:
it like Some rich people buy a yacht NOT because it's cheap but because
they want it. So maybe we are doing what you suggest already and maybe
the ocean rise will never happen. Plenty of cities make fresh water
from sea water and it may be a more common thing in the future. The
real question is where is it being dumped? And shouldn't you fill the
African aquifer that has been drying up under the Sahara desert.
You can use nuclear for about $0.11 a watt right now. In fact Nuclear
ships (which I'm sure are more expensive) in our NAVY produce ample
purified water from sea water.... they went to Haiti after the earth
quake and one thing they did was produce fresh water.
Membrane for the R/O is NOT all that cheap and then all that health care
for the workers makes it cost several dollars a gallon to produce and
distribute purified water. And you would pump it into the ground?
There would also be a dispute as to who owns that water in the aquifer.
The $0.60 a watt is prohibitive except fort doing because you want to doOn Wed, 2 Jan 2013 10:26:50 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels and the infrastructure to make it viable would create, not to
mention the political storm any project causes.
it like Some rich people buy a yacht NOT because it's cheap but because
they want it. So maybe we are doing what you suggest already and maybe
the ocean rise will never happen. Plenty of cities make fresh water
from sea water and it may be a more common thing in the future. The
real question is where is it being dumped? And shouldn't you fill the
African aquifer that has been drying up under the Sahara desert.
You can use nuclear for about $0.11 a watt right now. In fact Nuclear
ships (which I'm sure are more expensive) in our NAVY produce ample
purified water from sea water.... they went to Haiti after the earth
quake and one thing they did was produce fresh water.
Membrane for the R/O is NOT all that cheap and then all that health care
for the workers makes it cost several dollars a gallon to produce and
distribute purified water. And you would pump it into the ground?
There would also be a dispute as to who owns that water in the aquifer.
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/4/2013 10:19 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
installation requires fossil fuel....
Can you get enough energy from a wind generator, to make another wind
generator? And why don't the Greenies use "GREEN energy only" when
they are producing and installing and maintaining their green energy.
If even the Greenies can't make "GREEN" their only energy, how do they
expect the rest of us to do it?
Maintenance includes plenty of driving and fossil fuel, construction andIf the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels
What is the CO2 produced/watt of PV?
installation requires fossil fuel....
Can you get enough energy from a wind generator, to make another wind
generator? And why don't the Greenies use "GREEN energy only" when
they are producing and installing and maintaining their green energy.
If even the Greenies can't make "GREEN" their only energy, how do they
expect the rest of us to do it?
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/4/2013 10:19 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
I want to see a Wind generator and/or PV plant that is run only on Wind
generators and PV power.
Where is that being done?
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels
What is the CO2 produced/watt of PV?
I want to see a Wind generator and/or PV plant that is run only on Wind
generators and PV power.
Where is that being done?
B
Bret Cahill
Guest
What is the CO2 produced/watt of PV?If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels
And while you are at it, tell everyone the elevation of Al Gore's
mansion above mean high tide.
Bret Cahill
B
Bret Cahill
Guest
Who gave you that figure?If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels and the infrastructure to make it viable would create, not to
mention the political storm any project causes.
The $0.60 a watt is prohibitive except fort doing because you want to do
it like Some rich people buy a yacht NOT because it's cheap but because
they want it.
You can use nuclear for about $0.11 a watt right now.
Bret Cahill
1
1treePetrifiedForestLane
Guest
ridiculous; all of the datum shows that AnIS and GrIS continue to
rise,
and how can that be?
rise,
and how can that be?
That means that on the BAU model you can expect the melt rate
to continue up to the icecap tipping point, after which it starts to
shoot up exponentially.
1
1treePetrifiedForestLane
Guest
the primary maintenace activity is keeping green plants
from shading the device, perhaps by herbiciding the lot;
I want to enact a rule, that no *prior* removal of trees be done,
for teh sake of "new rooftop solar," since selective coppicing can
be done, afterwords, to maximize the PVic, anyway.
from shading the device, perhaps by herbiciding the lot;
I want to enact a rule, that no *prior* removal of trees be done,
for teh sake of "new rooftop solar," since selective coppicing can
be done, afterwords, to maximize the PVic, anyway.
Maintenance includes plenty of driving and fossil fuel, construction and
installation requires fossil fuel....
M
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
josephus wrote:
If you pump sea water into the auquifer, many places will have no
drinking water. Wells in Florida go directly into it's aquifer, and
there is already problems with contamination from sea water.
Unum wrote:
On 1/2/2013 7:23 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Unum wrote:
On 1/2/2013 12:26 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.
Preserve usenet trolls in it?
Pickled trolls. Mmmmm
its not bad as a quibble. if you pump sea water into the aquifer
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
If you pump sea water into the auquifer, many places will have no
drinking water. Wells in Florida go directly into it's aquifer, and
there is already problems with contamination from sea water.
M
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
1treePetrifiedForestLane wrote:
Like the idiots who make it illegal to remove dying trees that fall &
kill people?
the primary maintenace activity is keeping green plants
from shading the device, perhaps by herbiciding the lot;
I want to enact a rule, that no *prior* removal of trees be done,
for teh sake of "new rooftop solar," since selective coppicing can
be done, afterwords, to maximize the PVic, anyway.
Like the idiots who make it illegal to remove dying trees that fall &
kill people?
J
josephus
Guest
Bret Cahill wrote:
josephus
because the aquifer is poisoning you?if you pump sea water into the aquifer
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
Leave it down there.
A lot of ground water is toxic, Cd and other heavy metals.
Bret Cahill
you are silly. are you saying that the reason you are so impaired is
josephus
S
Sleepalot
Guest
Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
It's water that makes sink holes, by dissolving and eroding the rock.If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
If it was me, I'd irrigate Spain, N.Africa, etc, with some of that water.
Most of it needs to be injected where it won't evaporate and will help
prevent sink holes.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Bret Cahill
For a couple of million you could flood the Qattara Depression - it's only
about 50km from the Mediterranean coast - using windmills and ditches.
That would;
Lower sea-levels a little.
Create flamingo habitat.
Create a Dead Sea type tourism facility.
Create a salt industry.
Reduce regional temperature.
Increase rainfall somewhere a little.
...
Ha! I've been saying this for years, and today I find people have actually been
looking into it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project
Of course wikipeadia goes full-stupid, talking about nuclear explosions. Tsk.
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/4/2013 10:48 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
stripped away from the water molecule as are calcium and iron and
others... the R/O membrane takes out 90% or so of all Total Dissolved
Solids(TDS)
The biggest problem is the cost of all the GREEN ENERGY and the COST of
the water treatment to make purified water to put in the aquifer. Today
a typical bottle of purified water off the Grocery Store shelf is about
$1.00
Doing that with Green energy will make it more expensive and doing it
with raw untreated sea water will drive the cost up also. Then you will
have a question of who owns the water in the aquifer, is it Farmers or
cities or home owners or the parson injecting the water into the aquifer
or is it rain water and manna from heaven.
purifying membranes to make the water into Fresh water, The Salt isjosephus wrote:
Unum wrote:
On 1/2/2013 7:23 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Unum wrote:
On 1/2/2013 12:26 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.
Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.
Preserve usenet trolls in it?
Pickled trolls. Mmmmm
its not bad as a quibble. if you pump sea water into the aquifer
what do you do about a the NaCl (salt for the science impaired)
If you pump sea water into the auquifer, many places will have no
drinking water. Wells in Florida go directly into it's aquifer, and
there is already problems with contamination from sea water.
The idea was to pump the sea water through Reverse Osmosis water
stripped away from the water molecule as are calcium and iron and
others... the R/O membrane takes out 90% or so of all Total Dissolved
Solids(TDS)
The biggest problem is the cost of all the GREEN ENERGY and the COST of
the water treatment to make purified water to put in the aquifer. Today
a typical bottle of purified water off the Grocery Store shelf is about
$1.00
Doing that with Green energy will make it more expensive and doing it
with raw untreated sea water will drive the cost up also. Then you will
have a question of who owns the water in the aquifer, is it Farmers or
cities or home owners or the parson injecting the water into the aquifer
or is it rain water and manna from heaven.
B
BeamMeUpScotty
Guest
On 1/5/2013 1:21 PM, Sleepalot wrote:
Wouldn't it be best to use the water to fill the Reservoirs for the BIG
cities drinking water? And thereby let Nature refill the aquifer?
Or refill the Sahara desert aquifer with R/O water..... it's been
emptying out for 15,000 years. They have a lot of sun and wind for
power and a big empty aquifer that isn't suppose to start to refill for
15,000 more years. According to the climate cycles and the tilt of the
axis. It might even make the place habitable again.
I see law suits....Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.
The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.
If it was me, I'd irrigate Spain, N.Africa, etc, with some of that water.
Most of it needs to be injected where it won't evaporate and will help
prevent sink holes.
It's water that makes sink holes, by dissolving and eroding the rock.
Wouldn't it be best to use the water to fill the Reservoirs for the BIG
cities drinking water? And thereby let Nature refill the aquifer?
Or refill the Sahara desert aquifer with R/O water..... it's been
emptying out for 15,000 years. They have a lot of sun and wind for
power and a big empty aquifer that isn't suppose to start to refill for
15,000 more years. According to the climate cycles and the tilt of the
axis. It might even make the place habitable again.