[extropy-chat] MNT and energy. (was Re: Social Implications of Nanotech)

[Mike Lorrey]

--- Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> 
> When I said I do not advocate solar, geothermal, and sophisticated 
> conservation using current technology,  I was referring to a purely 
> local implementation.

Local as in what? That is a rather broad brush, don't you think? There
are actually quite a number of local areas where solar is extremely
cost effective, specifically in more remote locales where grid access
is not at all cost effective. Essentially, if you have to spend more
than $10k to get grid electric service to your dwelling, then solar is
more cost effective, and that is just photovoltaic. Passive solar is
actually even more cost effective, as it doesn't require expensive
solar cells, doesn't produce toxic chemicals as waste of the
manufacturing process, and enjoys a practical efficiency 3-8 times
higher than photovoltaic systems, though it is essentially only
applicable to heating and cooling.

> 
> With today's technologies, it is not cost-effective to retrofit these
> into an existing home in most cases.  There are of course many
> special cases, and new constructin will change the equation.
> In many case, it is quite cost-effective to retrofit simple
> conservation measures such as insulation and cheaper lighting.

In addition to converting any heatingor other application away from
grid electricity. LP or NG hot water heater, clothes dryer,
refrigeration, A/C, lighting, and cooking applications are very
inexpensively retrofitted into existing construction. Ask any member of
an Amish community or owner of a hunting cabin. Particularly with any
heating application, local gas burning equipment is generally more
efficient than grid power.

> 
> "Cost" is a fairly good approximation for environmental impact. If I
> buy capital equipment to lower my energy usage or generate my own
> energy, the purchase price of that equipment represents a certain
> portion of the GDP i.e, of the nation's overall economic activity.

Versus spending more money on grid power. Investing in more efficient
production equipment of any scale builds GDP over the long term because
it improves the comparative advantage of the economy as a whole.

> But economic 
> activity produces environmental degradation. I pay a workman to
> install my solar panels, and he uses the money to fuel his SUV, etc.
> On a power grid or pipline grid, renewables, solar, geothermal,
> etc may may economic and environmental sense.

You get more environmental degradation when you waste money on more
expensive resources. Spending 1.5 cents/kwh on conservation degrades
the environment less than spending 8 cents/kwh on increased
consumption.
(the 1.5 cents includes capital costs) Furthermore, by decreasing
consumption on inefficient methods, you make more resources available
for other economic activities at a lower market price (due to decreased
demand)

> 
> Now, on to nanotech!
> 
> Solar and Geothermal: MNT and local fabrication is likely to drive
> the 
> material capital cost to near zero, and may dramatically reduce the 
> installation cost as well. This includes the energy storage system, 
> convertors, and control system. Again, I'm talking about a standalone
> per-household installation. "geothermal" is really "geoheatsink" in
> this case: I'm using the ground or an available body of water either
> directly for cooling or as one side of a heat pump.

This is actually generally passive in nature. The heat comes from
somewhere, either as solar energy or tectonic activity. When you are
actively extracting energy from the tectonic system to power a turbine,
this is an active form as opposed as simply and passively using a
building foundation's thermal footprint to mitigate HVAC costs.

> 
> Sophisticated Conservation:
>     This might better be called heat management. Most energy use in a
> home relates to heat. Heating, cooling, hot water, cooking, 
> refrigeration, and freezing. MNT can provide near-perfect
> insulation,. 
> It can also provide the materials for heat transfer systems within a 
> dwelling that make the best use of energy, including counterflow air 
> exchangers. If you already have solar and geothermal systems, you can
> move heat around directly rather than wasting high-density energy to 
> produce low-density heat. You use shades and evaporative cooling 
> outside. You can store heat from the frezeer to heat a room, move
> cool 
> groundwater into the refrigerator precool circuit, and generally 
> minimize the extra energy you need to manage temperature. The capital
> cost of a comprensive heat management system is prohibitive with
> today's technologies, but it nearly free with MNT.  Again, a careful
> component design can minimize installation costs also.

Depends on where you build and how. Building underground requires no
significantly greater construction costs or advanced technologies, yet
provides almost perfect heat management. MNT does not, IMHO, provide
any significant advantages over current underground building
technologies.

The primary advantage, I think, is using MNT in the waste treatment
cycle to more efficiently produce more burnable fuel. Current waste
management uses anaerobic methods to produce gas which is simply
evacuated to the atmosphere. Primarily methane, i.e. natural gas, this
is highly valuable and useful in providing all of a family's energy
needs, including electricity generation, if it were captured and put to
use. 

Expanding this from human waste to other garbage disposal needs of the
family, from wasted food (bones, fats, vegetable waste, etc) to
burnables like paper, plastics, yard waste, etc would greatly reduce
the impact of the human home on the environment both in terms of
resources required and wastes produced.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree