User Tools

Site Tools



This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

helmut_burkhardt_association_howard_odum [2015/01/31 23:55]
helmut_burkhardt_association_howard_odum [2020/07/27 15:38] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +Discussed at [[connections-20080112]]
 +  * [[Helmut Burkhardt]] respects [[Howard Odum]]'​s work, but has some issues because Odum isn't a physicist.
 +  * [[Helmut Burkhardt]] attended a workshop by [[Howard Odum]] at a workshop on //The Prosperous Way Down//.
 +  * Burkhardt says that solar energy is plentiful, but Odum said that it was too diffuse.
 +  * Odum also said that the energy was highly distributed,​ it doesn'​t have quality, e.g. oil is concentrated.
 +  * Correct: second law of thermodynamics. ​ The quality of the energy depends on the source, e.g. oil is about 3000-4000, whereas solar energy is 6000.
 +  * Technical efficiency is 95%, oil is 65%, bioenergy is 1%; thus, would need to collect a lot more.
 +  * [[Helmut Burkhardt]] admires [[Howard Odum]]'​s creativity in ecosystems, but Odum is working on some wrong assumptions.
 +  * Problem is theoretical.
 +  * Engineer'​s concept: ​ entropy law is backward, you get more of something negative, not something for nothing: ​ exergy
 +  * Energy as the ability to do work, that is nonsense.
 +  * There'​s lots of heat energy in the ocean, but can't get to it.
 +  * Ocean energy as waves, kinetic is pure exergy.
 +  * Exergy is the part we pay for.
 +  * Odum created a concept of emergy; Burkhardt is not sure that this is helpful.
 +  * James Kay uses exergy, less controversial.
 +  * Odum's damage has been to get a public perception that solar energy is not viable.
 +  * Gain of solar technology is not bad today, with a life of 30 years, and a payback in two years.
 +  * Look at Energy Return on Energy Invested