Alternative Energy
By saying alternative energy, this often indicate usable energy other then fossil and nuclear, particularly Renewable Energy that do little harm to the nature.

Solar Energy
"Only 0.1% of land mass needed to power the entire human civilisation."
Abundance, intense, and nearly infinity source of energy - Sun. Since aeons mankind has worshipped Solar as god. And today, technology to harness the power of Sun has been developed, and some of the technology allow for storage of solar energy which can be made available at night or cloudy days.

Wind Energy
"The wind energy from just three states of America can power the whole country."
Nearly every corner of the Earth has wind. And with a wind turbine, which construct of simple technology: blades, gearbox and a small generator, we are able to harness the unlimited, renewable and free. Wind Energy is the fastest growing alternative energy in the world, as many has realised the benefit of wind. Wind turbine is something that can work silently and passively at your neighbourhood by merely taking even less space then some advertisement banner.

Hydroelectric Energy
The power of water, easily stored, easily managed, easily available at any possible time, hydroelectric power has already became one of the main source of energy. How far can this go? How possible can we do this without interfering too much on nature? Hydroelectric Power doesn't always means massive concrete block and sinking several eco system under a lake, micro hydro, a smaller of hydro power, can supply electricity to a community and has much lesser ecological influence.

Post will be updated occasionally.

Old post below


This post has been edited by rexis: Aug 26 2009, 05:35 PM

You're veering dangerously close to the politics of it, which would be RWI

I'll kickstart the thing with a focus on the more technical aspects instead.

Currently, the 2 great hopes I've managed to discern when people speak of alternative energy sources are the following: wind, and solar

The 2 sources suffer from a major problem though; that the power generated is inconsistent due to weather fluctuations. We've grown used to wanting to boil water when we want to, not only when the sun is extremely bright and it's hot.
That then brings in the hidden cost of these alternative sources: you need energy storage mechanisms, which in turn reduce the efficiency of these alternative systems further.

This inconsistency of power generated also guarantees that you will always have to build more capacity than is needed, so that you can generate extra energy to compensate for the downtimes when the weather doesn't permit.

But generally, increasing efficiency for now is our best option if we want to save in terms of carbon costs.

[Political part now: A relatively simple way to increase solar power/wind power adoption in Malaysia would be to institute a buyback policy on TNB, where TNB has to buy back power generated by solar/wind installations installed in homes at a higher rate than what consumers have to pay for electricity supplied, as in Germany. However, electricity prices in Malaysia are so low as to probably make the return on investment negligible after 20-30 years. Perhaps if electricity prices were raised to RM0.70-0.90/kWh, and the buyback scheme paid consumers RM1.00/kWh generated, this would be quite economically viable]

This post has been edited by bgeh: Aug 9 2009, 01:24 AM

The term "Alternative Energy" indicate an unconventional source of energy. As the term indicate, it is alternative ways of doing the same thing of generating power, and sort of give impression like cannot be used as the primary solution.

And this stage of development, there isn't any example of countries with primary source/base load as alternative/renewable energy, most of them serve as compliment to the base load which usually relying on fossil fuel.

However, base load renewable energy is completely possible, perhaps the incurred cost will be higher, but there are already some prototypes which relying mainly on renewable energy. For example, solar tower. It made of a series of mirrors which deflect sunlight and focus them on a single point, sort of like what a converging lens do, and the focus point will generate intense high temperature which is utilized to heat steam and spin turbine. It has an energy storage system consist of hot molten salt which enable energy supply at night.

We have a sunny sky and hence plenty of solar energy, but the possibility to install a large arrays of mirrors is small and might be better to utilize our averagely green and fertile soil into agriculture. Installing solar panel on every roof top might not justify the cost as our resources are rather limited it is not a good way to spend our tax payers money, and we are not ready to pay a premium for expensive solar energy either. Small scale solar facility might be workable but it will be far from contributing a significant amount to our national needs.

Finland is a world leader in wind energy, they have the highest wind energy usage in the world. According to them, a base load energy source from an unpredictable source like wind energy can be completely possible. They have went far into developing wind energy, one of the latest wind farm they started is floating wind farm, a series of floating wind tunnel located off shore, eliminated the need to allocate lands for wind farms. Wind energy is the fastest developing alternative energy in the world.

But be it whatever kind of alternative we might look into, the most important thing to do now is to minimize waste of electricity, as we all aware of, TNB is buying electricity from IPP, and the contract work like TNB has to purchase all the agreed electricity generated, regardless of whether there is a demand or not, this result in wasting of precious energy fuel and must be properly managed. IPP will continue to squeeze TNB to purchase more electricity for their own profit, rather than to meet the demand. That is why we should tackle this problem first before we seriously look into alternative energy, otherwise, any extra source is just some more wastage.

Solar towers still require sunlight to generate electricity, and even the cool convection tower idea would require the same, so the base load problem still cannot be avoided. They still require the same energy storage mechanisms to smoothen out the base load

The problem about Malaysia and wind energy is that I doubt we have much useful, extractable wind energy, relative to Finland. Geography tends to matter a lot when we speak of solar and wind, and it seems that wind is quite unfeasible, afaik anyway, in Malaysia

Perhaps I have spent too much time in RWI, but it is undeniable fact that government is the one to decide whether certain alternative energy will kick start.

Rather then relying on one single source of alternative, it is recommended to make them compliment each other. And when all has failed, we still can kick in our diesel generators.

Perhaps it is not wise to follow blindly what others have, we should develop a technology that fits ourself most. Wave energy is 24/7 and is unlimited, with the long sea shore we have, but there isn't any working model just yet to generate power with it. Biomass however, is something that considered something that is quite accessible.

With the intense agriculture activity we have, and the warm climate we live in, we only have the problem to dispose biomass rather then acquire it. Each and every palm oil mill we have is potentially a net power producer, some by burning empty fruit branch, while some construct bio digester for their waste and collection of methane, to meet their energy demand, and often with a surplus.

Of course, at the rate nowadays we are consuming energy, biomass can never meet most of our demand, but it work as a compliment to our national grid.

Precisely. And that's why I would advocate for a mixture of energy supplies, because nuclear; etc can be useful due to their inherent benefits.

Allow me to add one more point for why energy storage mechanisms are extremely important for solar especially. We do have a slight solar variation throughout the year, mainly due to the monsoon affecting the number of hours we get unimpeded sunlight. You can plan for the day/night deficit because our days are relatively constant, but this variation will force you to increase capacity further instead, shifting the economics further away from it being ever applied em masse.

I still think nuclear is the future for mankind,at least until fusion matured after 1 century from now.I think nuclear would be more sustainable with the new,upcoming Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor and Very High Temperature Reactor(Discover,June 2009).Nuclear power generation just get safer and more efficient.Sodium Cooled Fast Reactor even could use spent uranium fuels as fuel which also shortens the time needed for the waste to be not radioactive.

Coal burning pollutes the environment too much.

Solar and wind are too dependent on weather.

Malaysia could get more hydroelectric dams,though but it destroys the surrounding environment.It's expensive and time consuming to build.

What about wave power? With almost every state in Malaysia having access to the ocean, this could very well be a viable alternative energy source for us. Waves are also more consistent compared to solar and wind. The problem i heard with this technology is the extremely high setup cost which i guess is due to building something in the middle of an ocean which is not an easy feat.

If im not wrong,the out put is pretty low too,but i did saw some more recent development to cut down the cost and increase the efficiency.

I read some article about an interesting comparison of nuclear energy and solar. That all our river water and sea water contain some tiny bit if dissolved uranium originate from the earth crust. If we filter the river water before the flow into sea for dissolved uranium as reactor fuel, it would be more then enough to power up the entire planet, and it will last longer then our sun. And since river water is renewable, so uranium can be considered as sort of renewable as well.

Most importantly, nuclear power is massive enough to satisfy our power hungry needs. It can function as base load, as well as peak load alone.

But then, one of the weakness of nuclear energy is that it is being too massive. Any slight error will render the entire city inhabitable for the next 10000 years and pollution to the entire continent, permanently. So it is like a double edge sword, with one end extremely useful, and the other extremely deadly. There are promises that nuclear reactor technology is quite matured, but then, people just can't be too sure about it.

No one can be so sure about fusion reactor, so far the biggest experimental fusion reactor ITER is already a friggin huge installation, can't imagine what kind of size the real thing will be. But who knows, 500 years later we can fit a fusion reactor into a vehicle.

And talk about solar, being the most reliable energy source in space, there are a proposal which involved a satellite with large solar panels launched into orbit, and transmitting energy back to earth via microwave. Now this is something that unaffected by weather, renewable, and reliable. The only problem is cost.

Wave energy is yet another renewable source that is available for 24/7, however it is extremely difficult to harvest this multi directional, slow, and strong energy. Constructing such device must be able to withstand storm and weather condition too. But it is not impossible. A commercial example of wave farm generator is the Pelamis(aka Sea Snake) Wave Energy Converter. source

Three of these thing can produce enough power for 1500 families, it is certainly not low.

This post has been edited by rexis: Aug 10 2009, 01:06 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulosic_et...cal_approach.29

Folks,

We have plenty of waste from Palm Oil plantation. They are all fiber based. If we can use cellulase enzymes to convert them into Ethanol, we solve two problems.

A) What to do with the waste

B) We have an renewable energy source.

Dreamer

Speaking of Cellulosic ethanol as an alternative energy...There has been establishment using process simulation software to look at bio refinery design at the moment.

Let's look at economic point of view:

Fundamental scale of economies can be achieved if 5,000 to 10,000 tonnes of biomass per day can be processed. Else, if the tonne metric is below 2,000 per day, the capital costs will go upward.

Let's go the science point of view:

Is it cleaner and greener? For the combustion of ethanol, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, both known carcinogens are produced. Levels of peroxyacetylnitrate (PAN) may also increase and this is definitely will not be a good news for our Ozone.

A more technical and safety measures should be addressed accordingly to achieve a sustainable resources. If this science hurdle is overcame, it would be a viable option to consider.

This however comes in the question of: Will Ethanol (Green Gold) could replace imported crude oil (Black Gold)? With Shell Oil predicting global market for bio fuels such as mentioned would grow to exceed $10 billion by 2012, I would not say the notion being coined by "dreamer101" is not viable. It's just a matter of time for us to have a potential substituting resources.

Malaysia can utilises the waste from Palm Oil plantation since our country has abundant pile of palm oil waste. Would our Government considering it's plausible possibilities? It can be considered as long as the environmental and economic issues are tackled accordingly.

Regards, Joey

p.s: Some excerpts are from Institute of Science in Society (back dated ISIS Report).

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Aug 10 2009, 11:02 AM

Joey Christensen,


<<Is it cleaner and greener?>>

Versus

A) Landfill

B) Burning them as it is aka Haze.

What do you think??

Dreamer

It seems that you didn't really consider that option A) gives the ability for the fiber to rot back to soil again. But I still get your point though, that this is just another step at being more efficient at using our oil resources more efficiently.

Long term wise though, as oil stocks drop further I think biomass will become unviable because chemical fertilizers derived from oil will probably become more and more expensive.

This post has been edited by bgeh: Aug 10 2009, 11:08 AM

Option A and B are not viable. It's even worst off.

What makes me think is, if we can somehow or somewhat convert formaldehyde and acetaldehyde in a safely and/or environmental friendly manner, Cellulosic Ethanol is definitely a better choice.

Regards, Joey

---

Added on August 10, 2009, 11:11 amDecomposition is unquestionable. I have to admit, since "dreamer101" mentioned of landfilling, would it be " occupationally unsafe" to build high rise building on it? It sounded stupid but I can't get rid of the notion of landslides or "quicksand effect". (Highland Towers incident still gives me the shivers, yu know?)

Hey! Anyone thought of "sand"? Sand is everywhere! As far as my science mind can take me; glass, silicon are made of sand composition, right? It would be great if we can somehow uses it to create energy, right?

Regards, Joey

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Aug 10 2009, 11:14 AM

Alternative energy when demanded by people who have no technical knowledge regarding the subject often turns into a giant crapshoot.

For example, most of us think that installing power saving bulbs will save energy and thus help mother earth, but the reality is that due to the harmonics and switching load, you have to derate transformers as they start heating up and wasting energy, you get voltage fluctuations that have a detrimental effect on stability, you have circulating neutral currents and unbalanced loads further wasting power, not to mention, all of this has to be corrected by capacitor banks that require more resources to deploy.

Saving the earth? Best way is to turn the power off.

I'm in the power field and i realize after doing the math that nearly all alternative energy sources are pipe dreams at best. For example to reach 30 percent efficiency from Solar panels, you have to apply GAAS semiconductors, which comprise of Gallium and Arsenic, the latter being a poisonous compound. Not to mention the fact that silicon wafers are extremely expensive to produce at best, GAAS nonewithstanding.

Secondly with wave and wind power, you have the issue of transporting all that power from point A to B, add cable loss, conversion loss, coupling loss and other forms of loss, you have yourself a big problem. It's pretty obvious that a power generator of 1mW that's 1km away is going to deliver more power than the same generator 100km away.

Essentially there's no point dreaming until the dollars and cents parts add up. Our current industrial base is unsuited to such alternative power, and until we adapt it to be able to mass manufacture the supporting technologies, it's gonna be hard and expensive.

Alternative energy could mean a lot of things...one thing is alternative energy for transportation means and the other is alternative energy to power our factories and homes.

The developed nations have come up with a few good ideas and they are using it as of now.

As for alternative energy for transportation....battery power seems to be the way to go with all the advancements made in that field. There are other stuff like biofuel, H2, etc but the world seems to favor battery power and we 3rd world nations will soon follow suit. Why? Because the car manufacturers are taking that direction and even our own Proton is going for electric powered cars.

Alternative energy for powering the nation...hmmm hydro dams are good but in some countries....sorry la not going to work if u look @ their geographical condition...but one thing that almost everyone has...the sun. But solar powered systems has to be deployed in massive numbers to power cities and it alone takes up space.

The only viable source of power that humans are moving to is nuclear. There has been no major meltdowns for some time and nuclear power is getting safer and cleaner with progressive research in that field.

properly treated and engineered landfill area are able to be converted to other uses. not condo's though, single/double story terrace is possible.

but with current economic condition, and the availability of land in malaysia. this is not a profitable route. so most landfills are left to rot until they become unbearable

lets look at the options we have

solar - have you read on how solar panel manufacturers pollute the environment? this is the lousiest excuse for green technology that you can ever get.

wind/wave - we have very low potential for this energy type. i believe tnb has done research on this locally.

nuke - this is considered RE? nvm. the biggest problem with this energy source is the power plant. how sure are you that the project won't be ali baba sub sub sub con to somebody else. even if we manage to build it, i doubt that we are gonna let it go operational. Philippines has already built one under the mega corrupt estrada's regime (finished, can be connected to the grid) . it still haven't gone online yet. go figure.

hydro - submerges large areas underwater. the place where you build this power plant will be very far from where the power is needed. (think bakun) so get ready to build that hvdc link. the converter stations and cables ain't cheap.

biomass - low power output i guess. try gastification on the biofuel and it might burn like coal.

This post has been edited by spursfan: Aug 11 2009, 03:06 PM

Show proof or retract your statement.