NegaWatt scenario, a sober and clean energy future

[Did67]

Be that as it may, it begs the question: the growth of what? And so: is growth an end in itself?

And finally, the growth of material goods in a finite world is a mathematical model dead in advance ...

What one could add: a certain number of sociological studies show very clearly that there is no lein between the "feeling of satisfaction, wellbeing and happiness" and the q "goodness of goodness. materials / GDP, etc. "(of course once basic needs have been met). Today, consumption (a good part of consumption) is an addiction ! [what an interest to have a nopuvel Iphoen while the old one still works, that we use 10% of its features - if not: a) Apple's profits; b) the satisfaction of an addiction - ephemeral happiness to exist or to exist more than its neighbor? ; c) destroy the planet a little more ...

Go. Subject of philosophy. I pick up the copies in 4 hours!

Conclusion: it will be necessary to have a break in the model, so the decline consented, after awareness. As a drug addict regains happiness after weaning! But before any therapy, you must be aware of your state of dependence. We are far from it (I speak massively and not of the few decreasing ones) are anything but unhappy, in any case much less than the great troop of imbeciles who are still stuck in the spiral of crossance).

Second subject to choose.

[RIAZ]

Why get tired to dissert on growth or decayby manipulating such smoky concepts that many people of good faith can defend them or fight them with equal ardor?

If a company like ours, engages on a scenario like Négawatt, does it make growth or decay?

In fact, we do not care !!!! What matters, if it works, is that there will be a future for the generations that follow us. And this future is not an abstract horizon for nerds who lack nothing. The children who today are learning to walk or who finish their internship in utero and who will see the end of the century, are our grandchildren or our children, that is to say all but virtual or even foreign beings. We are already in the hard!

And what really matters is precisely to know if that can or will work!
Is this beautiful mechanics developed by a lot of very competent people and disinterested has one (or more) fault (s), if yes, which ones, and call into question the whole scenario, etc ....
It is (AMHA) to be interested in, the rest is as important as sex discrimination of angels!

I regularly seek the opponents of the negaWatt scenario. It's not easy, as soon as you want to have arguments of the same level. The anathemas and great peremptory affirmations abound, the demonstrations are absent.

One of the main criticisms is the lack of encryption (in €!). This shows that people have not understood (it may be poorly explained!) Or that it is a dialectical spin.
Négawatt has sought a path that respects the laws of physics, which leads to environmental levy compatible with their renewal, that makes no technological bet conditioning success and does not take the risk (even low) of a disaster that (finally) no one would want to see it happen.
negaWatt shows a path that is feasible and corresponds to a global choice of the least regret. How much does it cost, is another question .....

This is where sneers can burst, those of negatep for example (but they are not the only ones)
Because they, who are of course serious people, people who know that there is a crisis and there is no more money in the coffers, people who can count the € (better than the Kwh sometimes), can say that the negaWatt scenario is economically unrealistic. They do not even bother to encrypt it seriously (which will obviously be necessary), but sway figures without proving anything.

But the real question is whether there is an interest in quantifying solutions that do not work or that make risks immeasurable.
The first step is therefore to agree on what is desirable, then to find the means to make this desirable ("technically", in short) possible. Finally to see how we finance this beautiful thing ...

We must proceed in this order, otherwise we will finance future disasters !!!!

[tapioca89]

From memory, I had heard of a study that shows that past 1 500 € head, happiness no longer increases: once all basic needs are satisfied, the only way to increase its consumption is to have a bigger house or a bigger car, but past the effect of discovery, people are pleasing their joujous and are not happier in the end.

Concretely, in the US or France at the end of the 1960 years and early 1970, we were not unhappy, it was even the opposite: opulence period ... But since, the GDP has been multiplied by 3 grosso modo and the crisis has gone through.

Like what money does not make happiness even if it contributes ...

[Christophe]

From memory, I had heard of a study that shows that past 1 500 € head, happiness no longer increases: once all basic needs are satisfied, the only way to increase its consumption is to have a bigger house or a bigger car, but past the effect of discovery, people are pleasing their joujous and are not happier in the end.

Exactly, we even launched a topic recently on this subject: https://www.econologie.com/forums/consommati ... 11758.html

[Napo dwarf]

well, we'll put a little bit of technique back

http://www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/avis-expert-jeanfrancois-papot-enr-methanation-intermitence-15627.php4

for the asso negawatt methanation is one of the tracks whose potential is the most important

[dedeleco]

In summary, they propose to store electricity by making methane by electrolysis in H2 then methane, 60% yield they say!

To redo electricity, it falls to 60% x 30% = 18% max.
If this electricity is photovoltaic panels yield 15% is recovered after electricity only 18% of the 15% of the starting sun is 2,7% in stored electricity of the sun fallen on the panels !!!

A little weak, it seems more efficient to concentrate solar thermal (more than 50% yield) and to store in the various various possibilities, such as melted salts or in the earth in solar geothermal form (similar to the hot volcanic underground volcanoes where it is stored. solar heat) to recover 80% of these 50%, to heat or to make electricity with thermal machine that gives 30% of 50% is 15% in electricity of night and day, 15% of the sun of departure, also although the photovoltaic panels, them without any capacity of storage, with this output !!!

For the electricity of wind turbines, with methane storage complex, have recovered 18% of the original electricity, while by pumping storage in dams height is recovered 50 70%.

[RIAZ]

Visibly, dedelecoit is not entirely this option that interests those who work on the subject.
Producing electricity with a yield of 30% and making beautiful white plumes is what we used to do ...

If we want to be successful, we will have to make other choices.

[dedeleco]

Producing electricity with a yield of 30% and making beautiful white plumes is what we used to do ...

Concentrated solar thermal power generation in closed circuit, efficient, modern, with storage for moments without sun, underground, or in molten salts, does not make white plume, with what circulates, salts , oils, other, clever !!!!!

[RIAZ]

My reference to 30% came from there:

To redo electricity, it falls to 60% x 30% = 18% max.

And here we make a white plume!

But above all, we must not forget that the negaWatt scenario has been designed for France which is 2 to 3000 km too to the North for thermal power plants to concentration ....

[dedeleco]

France which is 2 to 3000 km too to the North for concentrating thermal power plants.

is not correct, especially in the South, like Odeillo !!!, if we accept a lower yield than in Spain, which is not at 2 at 3000Km.

And above all, if we store underground the summer heat for the winter, as in www.dlsc.ca for heating, but also possible for solar concentration, on a larger scale, in true geothermal solar !!!