tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1236895917331192509.post3300058587083399304..comments2023-05-17T04:01:26.506-04:00Comments on The Neutron Economy: Not all energy is fungible - and it mattersAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12086026121605548134noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1236895917331192509.post-28664640887511734252012-03-21T18:32:53.312-04:002012-03-21T18:32:53.312-04:00Without expressing a personal opinion, I do want t...Without expressing a personal opinion, I do want to point out that the "all of the above" attitude toward energy is central to President Obama's reelection campaign.<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eQs2EBWU3M<br /><br />Good post by the way.<br /><br />On the subject of fungibility though, you mention that renewable electricity sources like wind are not fungible. There is something missing here, which is that petroleum products ARE fungible to a very major extent. An oil distillation tower produces an entire range of products mostly distinguished by their Carbon chain length. These products are all destined for a wide range of different uses, but there are several reasons there's more to the story than that. There is product on the margin that can be directed to more than one use. The sophistication of the stratification of hydrocarbon products can't be understated, it's created virtually an entire commodities trading industry to itself. One type of product can also be converted into another. Particularly, long Carbon chains can be broken into smaller molecules via "hydrocracking" and other technologies. This more advanced type of manipulation comes at a cost, but it was developed in response to the fact that certain Carbon molecules have a price premium due to comparatively high demand. See: transportation fuels.<br /><br />Nuclear heat also has the opportunity to stratify itself among different products. There is a range of quality inasmuch as you can produce different temperatures with a nuclear reactor and making 1 Btu at a lower temperature is easier for a host of reasons, these are mostly materials/technological, although there is some neutron economy difference if we assume that we're speaking of thermal reactors only.Alanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16161965850899477592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1236895917331192509.post-88221880237702762712012-03-21T11:15:57.878-04:002012-03-21T11:15:57.878-04:00@Fritz - my first-glance interpretation pertains m...@Fritz - my first-glance interpretation pertains more to the general strength of support across a broad number of categories. The "consensus" of Republicans (close to 90%) seems to be oriented toward fossil fuel exploration - you're correct that at the very least, nuclear has a majority among self-identified Republicans, but honestly - again, solely my interpretation here - is that it's pretty weak, given that even vehicle efficiency mandates carry more support. Basically, the bulk of "strong" Republican consensus is almost entirely weighted toward oil & gas - this doesn't mean nuclear doesn't have support, but it certainly doesn't command the kind of consensus that fossil sources have.<br /><br />Going back to independents, my thought was not so much with respect to nuclear as it was the stronger consensus among a broader swath of energy options.<br /><br />Overall, it doesn't seem like *any* group enthusiastically embraces the "all of the above" strategy, although I suppose if you look at it on the basis of majorities, rather than consensus, one can make the argument that this is more favored by the Republicans than any other group. Basically though, my main thought here was the disparity between rhetoric and actual demonstrated support - for folks in both parties who call for an "all of the above" strategy, support seems rather fractured at best. "All of the above" seems more like code words for, "As long as I get what I want."<br /><br />Your mileage may vary, of course.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12086026121605548134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1236895917331192509.post-62727596825941232282012-03-21T09:59:17.742-04:002012-03-21T09:59:17.742-04:00Steve,
Self-identified republicans are above 50% ...Steve,<br /><br />Self-identified republicans are above 50% on all counts while independents are at 45% on nuclear. How does that lead to the conclusion that only independents might be considered to favor an all of the above strategy?Fritznoreply@blogger.com