Renewable Energies for CIV 4 !

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Elda king
Have any civ game included equator? Equator, north, south, west, east, are all human created concepts.

Not anymore than "up" is a human created concept...

[rio5]

Thanks for the replies,
instead of maintenance we may use adequate fuel consumption (plant may be cheap to build, but has more consumption, older plants have more consumption, RE has no fuel consumption), fuel prices may rise considerably when the planets stock goes to its end (according to Shell at 2040).

The equator is not created by humans, its given astronomy, that’s where the sun hits perpendicular most of the time on the planet (e.g. 3/21 and 9/22 at midday), where are virtually no seasons (always 12 hrs day and night, so no seasonal storage for solar energy is necessary), and usually receives a lot of sunshine. Its on a horizontal line in the middle of the map. The Poles are on the top and on the bottom line of the map, this is already implemented in CIV.

[CiverDan]

I dont want to see renewable energy in Civ4 if it is not going beyond the present day. At the present time its contributes a very small percentage of resource production in the world, specific locations such as Iceland aside. Have it as a pollution reducer, but thats all.

[rio5]

humanity existed for 50,000 years only with renewables, only for a period of 300 years fossil fuels (1750 to 2050 a.d.) have been / will be used, then it will go back to renewables.

By the way - fossile fuels are stored solar energy: photosynthesis by plants, they were food for microorganisms 150,000,000 years ago, then turned into oil, gas and coal (with a total conversion efficiency of 0.0000001%)

[realpolitic]

Originally posted by realpolitic

Ever hear of Oil Shale? There's a guy in Utah who claims he can refine it for $16/barrel. Even if he's wrong it's becoming competitive.

Originally posted by General Ludd
What does that have to do with renewable energy?

There's about twice as much Oil from Shale as from conventional oil, for a game that goes to 2100, that's enough. There is also Natural Gas in the form of Ocean Hydrates, that is nearly practical.

My proposal is this: we have technologies for Shale, Wind and Solar.


Traits of techonogies

Coal - Unlimited Very dirty Very lowtech (Coal still causes 30,000 deaths/year in US), cheapest
Oil - Limited, dirty lowtech,cheap

Nuclear - Limited (Uraniunium only is created in a supernova) dangerous medium tech (1950's), expensive
Nuclear breeder - Unlimited (plutonium producing), Extremly dangerous, expensive ,dirty (there was a book "We almost lost Detroit" about a plant that almost blew up like a nuke, medium tech (1966) - might be OK if the wind would blow radioactivity on your neighbor.

Advanced techs
Oil Shale - unlimited (if the game goes to 2100), dirty, cheap
Wind - can only produce 50% a countries power, clean, medium priced
Solar - clean, most expensive

[Xorbon]

Sorry to criticize, as I can see you put a lot of thought into this Rio, but your ideas seem to me to be way too detailed for Civ. SimCity on the other hand might be able to use some of these ideas as it has already got various types of power plants. Or even better, someone could create a new game named something like "Energy Tycoon" or "Sim Fuel".

I think the abstract way Civilization handles power plants is good enough, though I'd like to see a 'health' aspect added for pollution (not just unhappiness, like some people suggest). Coal Plants represent all of the dirty fossil fuel plants (coal, oil, peat). Hydro and Nuclear Plants are already in the game. (I would like to see Fusion Plants bought back.) And Solar Plants represent all of the various clean renewables (like thermal and photovoltaic solar, wind, geothermal, and perpetual motion plants). I don't think we need to break them down into 8 or so different types of plants.

Having said that, I like the idea of nuclear plants being vulnerable to "military attack" and causing pollution if destroyed in that way.

[realpolitic]

I don't think adding 3 new kinds of power plants, overcomplecates the game, it's just adding new improvements as time, technology, and the new situations arise.

[Xorbon]

You're right. It wouldn't overcomplicate the game. It would "over-detail" the game. If we add three more power plants, why not have six types of factories? Or four different types of barracks? Etc, etc. They could each have their own benefits/drawbacks.

Why not? Because they would make the game tedious with too many choices. Four plants is enough!

Like I said, these ideas belong in Sim City. If I saw the ideas on one of the Sim City forums, I'd be giving the !

[realpolitic]

It would actually only add Oil Shale and Wind while subtracting Fusion. The main purpose of Breeder plants is as a covert weapon. Nuclear Power plants produce hundreds of time as much power as nukes, now if a breeder went supercriticl, imagine the fallout of an "accident" on your competion downwind.

[Elda king]

No, 4 are allright! If you want changes, make: Combustion Plants, Hydro Plants, Nuclear Plants and Renewable Plant.

[Zoid]

Renewable Energy You could make this an option only for a new type of green government.

[krauter]

lets mod CIV 4 to implement renewables - take a look at
the modding section (Civ 4 files etc.)

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=4134670&t=1782#post4134670

[Grumbold]

There already is at least one energy tycoon game out there for the PC, I played one 6+ years ago. It had all these great decisions of picking unique power solutions from country to country based on available resources and terrain.

In Civ the windmills transform to wind energy turbines in the modern era. That's about as complicated as I think it deserves to get in a game where renewable energies would only be relevant for a small number of turns at the end of the game which can easily be cut short with an early win. I do agree that the recycling centre improvement wiping out all pollution unhappiness is a little over-optimistic

[Godzilla]

This concept seems more apropos for SimCity than for Civ. Civ is a broad concept based game (an infantry unit consists of more than 3 guys with rifles, religion has never been this simple) and getting too deep into those concepts (while interesting) would IMO take away from gameplay.

In real life, great...

In a game, I'll pass