Mark Twain had a famous saying “Most people in trouble is not their ignorance, but that they know so much not the case in the thing.” Today’s advanced information technology, energy and environmental topics almost every day to attract our attention, and even stimulate our nerves, everyone can say a few words on this, take the political is the right attitude. But really is that true? I am afraid many may not be so different.
Science squirrel popular science books I would recommend all to buy, you can say that books are great, where “the future president of the physics class” is a classic writer is professor of physics at the University of California at Berkeley, Dr. Mueller, who was awarded the MacArthur Award ( commonly known as the “genius award”), is the U.S. government’s chief adviser. I quoted the text view and the data mainly come from the book, but the data converted into what we used to say.
Why do we like gasoline and coal? The reason is simple, the weight of energy in the same comparison, the maximum energy released gasoline, which is 2 times of coal, methanol, 2 times, 1.4 times of ethanol, butanol (possible future fuel) of 1.1 times, TNT’s 15 times, the best battery (laptop battery) 100 times, 1000 times flashlight batteries. And, with the wind, solar compared to gasoline too cheap.
The coal is the cheapest source of energy, the energy of a ton of coal equivalent to 900 liters of gasoline, the cost of a ton of coal a few hundred dollars, and 900 liters of gasoline have to 5000, coal much cheaper than gasoline.
China can not afford the wind, solar, can only afford to use coal and oil, and China has a lot of coal, over the centuries are used up. Of course, coal energy than all the other damage to the environment are large, the same energy than oil and gas under the more carbon dioxide, but for China, coal power generation is currently no way to do.
Wind and solar energy is clean energy, why not use a large scale, mainly due to the high price of wind power and solar energy, low efficiency, without considering the cost of collecting wind energy equipment, operating costs alone for much more than oil and coal, This is not not want to use, but could not afford, established for political purposes throughout the wind power plants are basically making a loss shouted. In order to pass the cost of some local governments to force businesses to use a certain percentage of wind energy for, and pay higher costs.
Solar power on the ground is about 1,000 watts per square meter, this does not seem small, but the conversion efficiency of solar panels, only 15%, 41% laboratory efficiency of the battery, the price per square meter, up to $ 100,000 . Bath using solar energy can also be burning point, but far enough to drive cars, and covering the solar cells on the roof, even if 100% conversion efficiency (of course this is impossible), it would only provide a horsepower power. So, even if in the future, nor can there be solar car. The existence of solar-powered aircraft, such as “Pathfinder” No, the solar cell maximum power of 17 horsepower, load 45 kg and a wingspan of 75 meters, the speed of 30 km per hour to fly slowly.
There is also a way of using solar energy, is to use mirrors or lenses focus sunlight and water vapor to drive a steam engine burned out, Spain and got such a solar power plant, but the cost is 3 times the coal, mainly by the Royal support, at least in the does not promote the current value.
The most fatal problem electric vehicle batteries stored energy is compared with a small gasoline too much, even with the current best laptop computer batteries, the same weight, the energy of the battery is only 1% of gasoline, gasoline cars can fill up 500 km run, even if the battery light and low car made more smooth, running 50 kilometers, but also Xiecai had, and once again charge a lot more time than refueling time, and the battery charge a few hundred times after the waste , and another big tank you to death a new battery.
Electric vehicle market speculation has already begun, and its gimmick is the economic and environmental protection, in fact, these two statements are not scientific, first, in the current technical conditions, it is more expensive than petrol vehicles, if high enough, then government subsidies’d can be considered, but the high subsidies of consumer goods is not fair to taxpayers; Second, the battery is not a source of energy, but only an energy storage carrier, the electric charge to the inside or from the traditional coal, etc. , taking into account the conversion efficiency can not reach 100%, their emissions of greenhouse gases will be higher, though not ranked on the road Bale.
As nuclear power reactors can not explode like an atomic bomb, this is the consensus of the world of physical scientists, nuclear potential danger is that the container is broken, the release of radioactive gases and volatile elements like iodine. Chernobyl nuclear reactor explosion is not a nuclear bomb, the explosion is similar to ordinary explosives, due to design errors, not even a building surrounded by the container are not, if there is an accident is likely a person will not die. In the pebble bed reactor design, temperature of the graphite in place of uranium, even if the failure to reach the maximum temperature of the reactor, which is solid and reliable container material.
Controlled nuclear fusion is the future of nuclear energy, which is to provide energy for the reaction of the sun, this is the current research focus is to solve the energy problems of human hope, but scientists estimate that within the last two decades, I am afraid, can not become a reality .
Jianghai sun lakes, rising water vapor to form clouds, rain and snow to the mountains the next, and then down stream, the water we stopped building dams, power generation using potential difference, which is water. Hydropower does not produce any greenhouse gases and other pollution, and even unlike wind and solar power as possible to use a lot of pollution, heavy metals and chemicals, can be called the most green, the cleanest, most environmentally friendly energy, but also of its power generation is quite large. The cost of water is about 8,000 yuan / kW, water is the cheapest electricity, water and electricity are higher the proportion of the world’s countries, the cheaper the price.
However, it is entangled, it has become the environmentalists (we call pseudo-environmentalists) the most hated of energy. Some time ago, a senior water researcher scientists Zhang Boting (net water blog), a pseudo-environmental reporter refute the argument. Understood by the reporter level of hydropower development terms, the degree of development of hydropower is only twenty percent more, Sichuan, Yunnan, only ten percent level of hydropower development, but added, “However, China Most of the rivers of water resources development by up to 80%, Sichuan and Yunnan in Southwest China’s water resources development and level of some rivers and even up to 100%. ” Because the number of fabricated data and the logic of chaos, Zhang researchers called shameless ignorance, the result was the reporter to violate defamation lawsuit on the grounds.
Indeed, part of the dam will affect the construction of ecological environment construction will conduct a comprehensive evaluation before, and gives detailed analysis of the EIA report. The Nu River dam, for example, each designer hired by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Tsinghua University and other units of the dams on debris, sand, plants, fish, landscape effects were demonstrated. Some pseudo-environmentalists to water damage to the environment as the culprit, which is very worthy of our attention.
Environmental protection is undoubtedly important, but its essence is a matter of science, scientific conclusions should act as the basis for environmental protection, can not rely on faith and fanaticism to do things. Based on existing technology status and China’s national conditions, the state vigorously develop hydropower, and gradually expand the proportion of water policy is reasonable. Moreover, the largest coal carbon emissions will continue for a long period of time, no need to pseudo-environmentalists with the wind and wild accusations.