Thinking about "Power"
I was reading an article in the Seattle Times about harnessing the power of tidal energy to generate electricity this morning and had a sudden flash of realization. Let me begin by saying that I'm by no means perfect. I'm sitting here in my car that gets an average of about 27MPG, waiting for the beginning of a group drive in which about 20-30 cars are going to run hard for 100 miles or so. So I say again, I'm by no means perfect...
The thing that I realized this moring was that in all our interest in "Green Power" what we really want is "more power, just cleaner". I keep reading about all of these various new energy schemes, ways to harness energy without burning oil, hybrid powered vehicles, and the like. What I don't seem to see very much is any technologies that are substantially reducing the amount of energy being used.
A few years ago, the first really big way to save energy for a long time was introduced: the compact fourescent bulb. It has some issues, based on the technology, but under many situations can show a great deal os energy savings. We need more of this type of advance. Things that use less energy in everyday use.
Laptops are a good example of energy saving devices compared to a full desktop system. For most users, a basic middle tier laptop has more than enough horsepower to anything that user would need. But, of course, every user wants the latest, fastest processor, video card, and the biggest screen they can get. All that power uses a lot of energy, converting quite a bit into heat in the process.
I remember reading something in the last couple years about how large office buildings no longer are concerned so much with being able to heat the spaces, but to effectively keep them cool. They expend great amounts of energy on cooling the interiors, why hasn't someone thought of a way to harness all thay energy?
In the article I was reading this morning, they are now setting their sites on harnessing wave power. I wonder what kind of effect this is going to have on the already slightly stressed ocean environment?
Even Scott Adams (Dilbert) in his blog states that green energy is one of the highest priority tasks for our society. However, he also states it as such: "... coming up with green and economical alternative sources of energy would virtually solve all the other problems, either directly or by boosting the economy." I again have to say that coming up with alternative sources doesn't do much. We really need to alter our framework and focus on reducing the amount of energy that we (waste)/use in our daily life.
Edit: Here's what I posted to Scott's blog...
Which is more important to the long term health of the planet? Finding a way to replace the current energy sources, or finding ways of reducing the amount of energy we use in our everyday lives?
Think of it this way: If we keep using the same basic oh, call it an "energy signature" regardless of the source, our needs will increase continuously along with our population. However, if we can find more ways of conserving energy (by creating devices that perform the same or nearly the same with a lower "signature") then we can reduce the overall impact on the planet.
The thing that I realized this moring was that in all our interest in "Green Power" what we really want is "more power, just cleaner". I keep reading about all of these various new energy schemes, ways to harness energy without burning oil, hybrid powered vehicles, and the like. What I don't seem to see very much is any technologies that are substantially reducing the amount of energy being used.
A few years ago, the first really big way to save energy for a long time was introduced: the compact fourescent bulb. It has some issues, based on the technology, but under many situations can show a great deal os energy savings. We need more of this type of advance. Things that use less energy in everyday use.
Laptops are a good example of energy saving devices compared to a full desktop system. For most users, a basic middle tier laptop has more than enough horsepower to anything that user would need. But, of course, every user wants the latest, fastest processor, video card, and the biggest screen they can get. All that power uses a lot of energy, converting quite a bit into heat in the process.
I remember reading something in the last couple years about how large office buildings no longer are concerned so much with being able to heat the spaces, but to effectively keep them cool. They expend great amounts of energy on cooling the interiors, why hasn't someone thought of a way to harness all thay energy?
In the article I was reading this morning, they are now setting their sites on harnessing wave power. I wonder what kind of effect this is going to have on the already slightly stressed ocean environment?
Even Scott Adams (Dilbert) in his blog states that green energy is one of the highest priority tasks for our society. However, he also states it as such: "... coming up with green and economical alternative sources of energy would virtually solve all the other problems, either directly or by boosting the economy." I again have to say that coming up with alternative sources doesn't do much. We really need to alter our framework and focus on reducing the amount of energy that we (waste)/use in our daily life.
Edit: Here's what I posted to Scott's blog...
Which is more important to the long term health of the planet? Finding a way to replace the current energy sources, or finding ways of reducing the amount of energy we use in our everyday lives?
Think of it this way: If we keep using the same basic oh, call it an "energy signature" regardless of the source, our needs will increase continuously along with our population. However, if we can find more ways of conserving energy (by creating devices that perform the same or nearly the same with a lower "signature") then we can reduce the overall impact on the planet.
Labels: conservation, energy, Politics, Soapbox
posted by Stephen Hughes-Jelen at 9:55 AM
1 Comments:
We actually need to do both. Resources in general need to be conserved by people becoming more mindful of what we use and discard on a day-to-day basis.
What I am starting to see now, I think, is a disparity in application in daily lives based on income. Kids generally learn to not litter from school programs, but that behavior is not enforced at home. Many are from immigrant families and many of these families are from countries who have very destructive practices in ragards to earthly resources. Because their prioerity has always been to not starve to death - they have never been able to focus on the health of the earth. These observations come from living in our new mixed-income community but also the many years of living with neighbors from different countries. Not to make generalities, but our Asian neighbors were more holistic, into gardening and growing food - altho there was still a lot of litter around the trash can and on the ground. The neighbors from East Africa were more destructive, cutting down trees, butchering their fruit trees, never eating what fruit did grow, and the kids never came outside to play - for the 6 years we lived there.
I believe the generations behind us, who are born into "green", will get it entirely - hopefully it will be soon enough.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home