You Been Mooned Again

[current decision algorithms have Shelob topic selecting for publishing not before 8/24/16, however, as 8/18/16 is the Sturgeon Moon, a 'resurfacing, large, meaty, highly productive, economically important, ecologically cleansing' topic concerning the moon might be appropriate]

Please enjoy reprint of  blog episode from 5/6/14 below.

No credit information on this photo either. Found through the

higb.edu site on the subject of Apollo's anniversary. People

still do lunar cycle theater, apparently.                                          

So I went looking at this other blogger's site? He was all about 'renewable energy,' which, as a phrase, seems very wrong. You guys want to cull and collect non-expiring, or present energy. Because it's present, as in here rather than buried underground, and because it's present, as in it's practically gift-wrapped.

While I was looking at his site, I was struck by something odd. He kept referring to wind and solar power. To my knowledge, all that still depends on weather and technology, that (I'm sorry, but) sounds like isn't your most advanced, efficient tech benefiting from billions in R & D.

Now I know more could be done with those, but isn't there something a little more direct? The wind is erratic except in certain places where people don't live as much. The sun is always on, sure, but it's so far away that clouds can ruin your amounts. You know what's closer than the sun, always on, not so erratic, not so affected by weather, and always causes energy output where people already are?

The moon doesn't need photoelectric panels or a cloudless day to provide a massive, steady output of 'renewable' energy that doesn't ever shut off all up and down every shoreline on Earth. They're called tides.

I'm not an avid researcher, but I do know that there are places along every shoreline that don't make scenic beaches, safe swimming, great fishing holes, boat piers, etc. I also know that various water parks have machines that make waves. I also know that underemployment is so bad in America right now that three mechanical engineers worked in Home Depots in the northern Virginia area as recently as a year ago, and one good employee in particular stayed unemployed despite his best efforts.

So, why doesn't someone tell me why reverse wave machines wouldn't make good generators, and why no one appears to be building them under every big dock in America? I'm only guessing that there is a certain minimum and maximum size for efficiency, that there is a way to make them reversible, perhaps even 'self-ruddering' to account for erosion, and that there are five thousand ways to do it very badly wrong.

[end reprint] Hairy was, despite self-proclaimed incompetence as an engineer, absolutely correct. There are firms in the United States designing and redesigning reverse wave machines. Currently models that do not fail too rapidly to be economically viable require too much maintenance, have too many safety issues, or are too small to be a financial success. A slow-building handyman of high expertise should be able to power a small marina with twelve of the appropriately-sized models not for sale at this time. The handyman would have to build them. [resumes regularly scheduled computing]