Hawaii Energy Independence

Article in today's paper about Hawaii starting on a path toward energy independence with power from the wind, waves, and volcanos. Unless we get to battery powered transportation it seems like a pipe dream.

Sterling

How about ethanol from sugar cane?

When we visited a sugar cane plantation in Hawaii we learned that it takes an enormous amount of water to grow, so it's not really the environmental friendly solution you would think it is. Hawaii actually doesn't grow as much sugar cane anymore.

That's the same issue with growing corn to make Ethanol in CA - corn takes an enormous amount of water - water that CA doesn't have!

Don't get me wrong--the more energy we get from non oil sources the better. I think the wind farm on Maui is the right direction to go and there also is one on the South Point of the Big Island. Lots here in Texas too.

I read where it takes 1 gallon of oil to produce 1.2 gallons of ethanol.

Here is Texas people don't realize cars will coast to a stop and typically do a 2G start when the light changes and if they'd look ahead a block or two they'd see the next light is red. So what do they do? Get it up to 50 mph, do a 3G stop, and then complain about the mileage on their 8000# 12 cylinder Ford diesel dually F350.

Sterling

Actually the ford diesel is an 8 cylinder but their V10 gas engine burns fuel like a freight train.

DeniseM said:

When we visited a sugar cane plantation in Hawaii we learned that it takes an enormous amount of water to grow, so it's not really the environmental friendly solution you would think it is. Hawaii actually doesn't grow as much sugar cane anymore.

That's the same issue with growing corn to make Ethanol in CA - corn takes an enormous amount of water - water that CA doesn't have!

Click to expand...

Doesn't take nearly as much water as does rice, and California is the 2nd largest rice producing state in the US.

The reason why California isn't a major corn producing state is because California is such an excellent location for producing other specialty crops that can't be grown elsewhere.

***

Longer range, though, California is going to shift to producing crops that require less water. When farmers can sell their water to cities for two to three times as much as they would earn using the water in irrigated agriculture, it's clear that farmers are going to shift to crops with less water usage so that they can make money selling water to water suppliers in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego.

I'd think Hawaii would do well with wind and solar power. No lack of either in most places.

And is the South Point windfarm on the Big Island even functional? Last time I drove by it was mostly shut down. I don't think I saw any windvanes turning, and some were pretty broken down. Made it seem really creepy and other-worldly. With the absence on other people around that day, it felt a little like being in the old computer game "MYST."

Dave

I wonder if Hawaii can produce enough wind power without destroying it's fabulous scenery.

.

All renewables totaled together are but a drop in the bucket compared to what nuclear can produce. France did this decades ago and produces 80% of their electrical needs by that means. When we get serious, we will follow their lead.

There is a big difference between nuclear power in Europe and here in the States. In France (and the rest of the world) for example, there is a single design per country/region that is used and constantly refined. When a better way is uncovered for a particular safety system, etc. it is engineered and more easily retrofitted to each plant. The safety record is impecccable.

Here in the US, pretty much each plant we have is a unique custom design. Drives the cost of design, approval, and construction up through the roof (no pun) and thus is uncompetative by nature. Combine that with our "not in my backyard" approach to life and look what we end up with. A fleet of aging plants that are a nightmare to manage.

It is ironic that the country that perfected proto-economist Adam Smith's theories on economic efficiencies through specialization via Henry Ford's obsession with standardization has ended up with a mixture that is not "apples and oranges". But a basket of power plants that represent every fruit/vegatable known to man.

We desperately need "one" standard design that is tested and proven like the rest of the world. Our method has economically failed and costs the economy a couple of hundred billion a year in money that goes away (and never comes back home) to oil producing countries.

This is not a political statement, but an economic reality.

Another national challenge is our skill set. Having not had a single plant start since 1980 and Three Mile Island, we lack the people skills for a large program. In 1980, as a student at Georgia Tech, we had 3/4 of our nuclear engineering majors switch majors in the two months after the Three Mile Island accident.

I don't have the answers, but nuclear in the US is easily said and exceedingly hard to do. That's the unfortuate reality that isn't discussed much.

How about extracting energy from lava??

Kauai Kid said:

How about extracting energy from lava??

Click to expand...

Working with lava might be a bit hard - lava will melt pretty much anything it comes in contact with.

I can see some problems with trying to develop geothermal energy from a magma chamber. Namely, you would have to drill down towards the magma chamber to reach the heat. Of course, magma chambers contain magma, and if you create a path for magma to reach the surface, you could actually start an eruption. That prospect might pose some problems getting permitted.

Also, to extract the energy you need to circulate a fluid to be heated. But the rocks comprising Hawai'i volcanoes are pretty porous. So you would have problems containing your thermal fluid.

Actually there is a lot of water on Kauai so that wouldn't hurt the environment. Also alcohol from sugar cane uses about half as much energy as from corn so that's OK also. Israel is moving toward total plug in electric cars and they should be available within 5 years. Nuclear would make a lot of sense on Hawaii since the water for cooling is abundant and shipping would be a lot less than all the fossil fuel consumed.

If all us Hawaii lovers stayed home just think of the shrinking carbon footprint.

You start first!

Tiger said:

If all us Hawaii lovers stayed home just think of the shrinking carbon footprint.

Click to expand...

We got about three inches of global warming overnight!!! Whistler is experiencing record global warming as well - they've accumulated close to eight feet of global warming there.

GaryDouglas said:

All renewables totaled together are but a drop in the bucket compared to what nuclear can produce. France did this decades ago and produces 80% of their electrical needs by that means. When we get serious, we will follow their lead.

Click to expand...

I hope they don't put nuclear power on the Big Island what with all the earthquakes and volcanoes and lava. Might short circuit something.

Sterling

T_R_Oglodyte said:

Working with lava might be a bit hard - lava will melt pretty much anything it comes in contact with.

I can see some problems with trying to develop geothermal energy from a magma chamber. Namely, you would have to drill down towards the magma chamber to reach the heat. Of course, magma chambers contain magma, and if you create a path for magma to reach the surface, you could actually start an eruption. That prospect might pose some problems getting permitted.

Also, to extract the energy you need to circulate a fluid to be heated. But the rocks comprising Hawai'i volcanoes are pretty porous. So you would have problems containing your thermal fluid.

Click to expand...

They have presently drilled 10,000 feet deep on the big island according to a TV show I watched on the "history" channel. Geologist have determined the Big Island is actually at least twice as old as originally estimated.

Don't drill till you hit lava--just deep enough for a heat exchanger to start extracting heat from Pele's fires.

Thomas Edison thought the only way to go was Direct Current not Ocean Current.

Sterling

Will

johnmfaeth said:

I don't have the answers, but nuclear in the US is easily said and exceedingly hard to do. That's the unfortuate reality that isn't discussed much.

Click to expand...

With the Manhattan project and "a man on the moon" under out belt, the only thing we truely lack is the will to do it (and too many lawyers).

Kauai Kid said:

They have presently drilled 10,000 feet deep on the big island according to a TV show I watched on the "history" channel. Geologist have determined the Big Island is actually at least twice as old as originally estimated.

Don't drill till you hit lava--just deep enough for a heat exchanger to start extracting heat from Pele's fires.

Thomas Edison thought the only way to go was Direct Current not Ocean Current.

Sterling

Click to expand...

The other problem, as I mentioned is heat exchange fluid. Most geothermal projects actually use natural steam as the heat exchange fluid. But the rock forming the Hawai'i volcanoes is so porous that steam isn't contained - that's evident because despite the abundant rainfall there is little to no steam associated with Hawai'i volcanic eruptions.

You likely would face the same problem with any fluid you tried to use for heat transfer. It would just escape into the formation and wouldn't pressurize.