Charles Bird 
Member since Jan 5, 2018



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Safe, clean, and reliable

As far as nuclear power is concerned, it's the best compromise for electricity that we have-now more than ever. The power output's cost, quality, and availability provided by a nuclear power plant simply outweigh the cost of radioactive waste produced and possibility of radioactive contamination of a Fukushima like event. We are faced with depleting fossil fuel supply/rising fuel costs for oil burning power plants and the decline of hydroelectric power due to drought and depletion of aquifers. Solar and wind power both share an inherent weakness- inability to provide electrical demand as needed. Nothing yet can take the place of a continuous power generating turbine to provided for varying demands. I am simply amazed that people don't know that there are electrical power really has two components- electrical charge and magnetism. Solar simply cannot provide the inductive force necessary. Besides, what good is solar at night time? Anyone that's been sailing can tell you how reliable wind power can be- it's the reason why ships have engines and boats have motors.

Don't get me wrong. We need all the alternative power generation sources we can build, because if we wait until we are out of fossil fuel - we are screwed. The fuel cost involved in Carizzo Plains solar projects would amaze most people. If we run out of oil tomorrow, manufacturing and construction would cease- that's how dependent we are on oil. If we think we need it to survive a fossil fuel scarce future, we need to build it now- no, actually yesterday.

If we have a Fukushima like seismic event, we will have plenty more than just Diablo Canyon to worry about. It's already built, it runs, and hasn't broken yet. Let's not Chicken Little this to death.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Charles Bird on 01/05/2018 at 10:01 AM

Re: “Safe, clean, and reliable

NASA experimented with hydrogen powered turbine engines back during the age of the space race. I always wondered why we never combined liquid oxygen/hydrogen cryogenic compressor to power liquid hydrogen/oxygen combustion turbines. While it may need external power to get it up to speed, once it produces adequate liquid hydrogen, it could fuel the combustion to power a turbine. The complication lies in the compression part, but since it is a stationary power plant it shouldn't matter. Meaning it isn't powering a vehicle, but a drive shaft.

We already have Power-to-Gas technology, which uses electrolysis to extract hydrogen fuel from water. Why not a hydrogen fuel powered turbine power plant?

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Charles Bird on 01/05/2018 at 9:01 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2018 New Times San Luis Obispo
Powered by Foundation