"all of the above"

[NashvilleLefty]

This idea seems so simple I have trouble believing no one else has thought of it. Maybe I should submit a for a patent.

Firstly, consider the cost of building a drilling platform in the ocean. Now, consider those costs without the oil supply running out and without the environmental implications. Let’s talk about a continuous multi-platform energy platform. Hear me out.

We build a platform in the ocean with collapsible solar panels that can be contracted when storms approach. But, in between the panels we add wind towers to take advantage of the constant ocean winds even on cloudy days.

But, beneath the platform in the ocean itself we add turbines that take advantage of the natural wave energy of the oceans.

Below that, since this is a deep ocean platform just like so many of the drilling platforms we have today, we add thermal differential turbines, that take advantage of the temperature change between the upper ocean and the lower ocean.

All of the above are demonstrated sources of renewable energy. We are not talking “Science Fiction”, this could be done today with existing technology.

Most of the energy generated would have to be transmitted across cables to the mainland. However, this would be a one-time cost as opposed to the recurring costs of having ships collecting and transporting the oil as is done today.

However, if enough platforms are built so that there is a surplus of energy feeding across the cables, the excess energy could be used to turn ordinary seawater into hydrogen. After all, if the platform is in the middle of the ocean with access to virtually unlimited amounts of direct electricity and virtually unlimited amounts of water, why shouldn’t the water be transformed into a transportable form and why would we not want to take advantage of it?

Yes, we will still need tankers to transport the hydrogen just like we need tankers to transport the oil generated by the drill platforms today. Yes, the hydrogen tankers may take some modifications. However, if a hydrogen tank is compromised the hydrogen floats up. If an oil tanker sinks, the oil leaks out an contaminates wide swaths of the ocean, not to mention the PR problem.

Consider the difference in Insurance costs. If you don’t want to consider the human costs, I’ll talk about it in terms you can understand.

ROI. You can choose to lose customers forever, or you can choose to make temporary Investments that will Return a savings, or even a profit over the long term!

I am a Middle-class peon. But I am just Libertarian enough to keep wondering why the Upper-class keeps shooting itself in the foot. If Mittens and the rest of the Upper-class want to improve their position, then they MUST support the “lower classes”. Because they are the consumers who buy their products and allow them to exist in the first place.

Bottom-line; the more people who can AFFORD to buy your product - well, need I say more? If you have an upscale program, some people will buy it - but not enough to make it profitable. You need the Middle Class.

[dogknob]

1. They would rather go with Monsanto "company towns"

...where it doesn't matter if we can "afford" to buy essential products because the power of perpetual debt creates the sort of slave-based economy they're shooting for.

[Zax2me]

2. none of this gets a jet off the ground

Or powers an SUV full of kids around a city.
If it did, someone would have found a way to make money off it.

[Devil_Fish]

3. a quick google disproves your asertions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_vehicle


Hydrogen powered bus in use today.


Lockheed hydrogen powered jet still in concept stage.

Wile I grant you that it does not get a jet off the ground yet, it is more then capable of hauling an SUV full of kids around the city.

DF

[onethatcares]

4. we gotta start somewhere because

frankly what we've been doing is killing the planet and ourselves.

and yes, I have been trying to cut my carbon footprint.

[HiPointDem]

5. you don't really need the middle class these days. just the top 20%. cause that's who has the $.

According to new research from Moody’s Analytics, the top 5% of Americans by income account for 37% of all consumer outlays...By contrast, the bottom 80% by income account for 39.5% of all consumer outlays.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/08/05/us-economy-is-increasingly-tied-to-the-rich/

which means that the top 20% = 60% of all consumer spending.


furthermore, most economies historically had a large class of poor, a small elite, and a somewhat larger class that served the elite.

which mirrors our present situation in large degree. 1% = elite, upper middle class = their servants, courtiers, enablers - the buffer class.

the rest of us = workers and "threat" to workers, i.e. if you don't mind your ps and qs and keep working you'll be homeless, live in a ghetto, wind up on jerry springer, etc.

if the top 20% got 80% of the cash, they'd do 80% of the consumer spending. there is no particular reason a middle class is needed, except that it maintains the illusion of democracy.

but other control methods can be devised to substitute for the illusion of democracy.

[longship]

6. Hydrogen is *not* an energy source

Any hydrogen economy will be based substantially on electrolysis of sea water, a process which uses more energy than is in the resulting hydrogen. Yes, this can be done with solar, wind, nuclear, or other non-carbon source.

By itself hydrogen is energy storage, not a source.

That's not to say that it's not useful, but a hydrogen energy future does next to nothing to eliminate carbon fuels. It still does take all of the above.