|
Post by TheBadSeed on Dec 31, 2007 14:40:47 GMT -5
Train wreck in Reno might be just cause to level Down Town and rebuild to get it out of the 1930's slum (nevada)appeal it has atm. Sounds like you gotta bad case of RENO eNVy!
|
|
|
Post by TheBadSeed on Dec 31, 2007 16:19:23 GMT -5
No, Shot, hydrogen is not free power, never made the assertion that it was. It costs energy to create the hydrogen, as hydrogen is a carrier of energy, not a source. It is efficient power. According to Toyota in 2005, their hybrid "prius" runs at 40% energy efficiency. That is, 40% of the energy that is burned from the gasoline is used, and not wasted. That doesnt sound like much until you compare it to the 20% that most internal combustion engines run at, and the fact that nearly 90% of all energy created is wasted. The current generation of fuel cell engines out there run at right around 75% efficiency. Is it economically feasible? Not yet. It takes mass production to make something affordable. Lets keep yer asss outa this for now. The numbers you show here are related to the powerplant(motor). What I was talking about was the energy used to create the hydrogen to start with. That alone is not energy (likely cost as well) efficient. Keep my asss outta this for now? Lol! You scared, Shot? "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to the Dark Side. Great Fear I sense in you." -Yoda So, here's a link to an article about GE's new invention that will make hydrogen as cheap as gasoline. This is a new technology, I bet in 20 years, they find ways to make it even cheaper. That's the beauty of the market economy, as the demand rises, people figure out how to get the supply to market cheaper and quicker. www.technologyreview.com/BizTech-R&D/wtr_16523,295,p1.html hrmm, sorry, the thing keeps putting a space inbetwee the 6 and 5, just cut and paste, with the space removed, and should take you to the article.
|
|
|
Post by TheBadSeed on Dec 31, 2007 17:07:34 GMT -5
TheGreatSatan said: I'll take that as a compliment, as I think you're sincere about learning things from these discussions. I have to ask though, and maybe this is a topic for a different thread, but how do you define liberalism? I mean, I consider myself a conservative. See, throughout this thread, i've preached preservation. I've applauded energies that are more efficient, and less pollutive. I have made special emphasis to talk about the ones make sense financially. I applaud all the things done in order to conserve our resources and conserve our environment. Doesnt conservation fit into being a conservative? con·serve /v. kənˈsɜrv; n. ˈkɒnsɜrv, kənˈsɜrv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[v. kuhn-surv; n. kon-surv, kuhn-surv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -served, -serv·ing, noun –verb (used with object) 1. to prevent injury, decay, waste, or loss of: Conserve your strength for the race. 2. to use or manage (natural resources) wisely; preserve; save: Conserve the woodlands.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Dec 31, 2007 19:30:44 GMT -5
To quote the Apollo Astronauts...
"Houston - we have a problem"
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Dec 31, 2007 21:46:51 GMT -5
LOL, I've seen those. You plug them into the wall and they suck like 30 bucks worth of juice a day. Z, The problem is that it is cheaper to run a car off gas. If we had invested in nuke power long ago, those cars woulda been here 30 years ago. But because of the KGB and gullible liberals, we givin up nuke power for the dumbest reasons. We rather burn billions of tons of coal then deal with a little nuke waist that we could shove in a deep pit way out in the middle of nowhere. yeah read the article, it really is amazing. Don't be suckered by corporate BS. It can be done and it has been done. If the oil companies would stop buying all the latest patents...
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Dec 31, 2007 23:03:38 GMT -5
The article makes outrages claims for the benefits of a technology that's been around for several decades. The turbine combustion engine is no more energy efficient than a standard internal combustion engine. The only advantage of it is that it can run on just about any combustible fuel; that's why it powers the M1-A1 Abrahm's tank.
|
|
|
Post by Levi on Jan 1, 2008 10:25:26 GMT -5
I have never met a so called conservative Republican that was actually conservative.
Most of the people that I know that consider themselves liberals are far more conservative than any Republican.
|
|
|
Post by thegreatsatan on Jan 1, 2008 13:08:50 GMT -5
I have never met a so called conservative Republican that was actually conservative. Most of the people that I know that consider themselves liberals are far more conservative than any Republican. So am I a liberal then levi? Or a conervative? BTW, I think this is one of your 1st post that don't have some kinda personal attack. GJ
|
|
|
Post by thegreatsatan on Jan 1, 2008 17:32:38 GMT -5
LOL, I've seen those. You plug them into the wall and they suck like 30 bucks worth of juice a day. Z, The problem is that it is cheaper to run a car off gas. If we had invested in nuke power long ago, those cars woulda been here 30 years ago. But because of the KGB and gullible liberals, we givin up nuke power for the dumbest reasons. We rather burn billions of tons of coal then deal with a little nuke waist that we could shove in a deep pit way out in the middle of nowhere. yeah read the article, it really is amazing. Don't be suckered by corporate BS. It can be done and it has been done. If the oil companies would stop buying all the latest patents... "The Man" is always holdin us down... man. We'de have jet cars that run on water if "The Man" wasn't holdin us down... man. I saw the 100 mpg car on the history channel. BTW, what all goes into making the batteries for these things. If you want millions of these on the road, you'll need lots of big batteries.
|
|
|
Post by Levi on Jan 2, 2008 10:03:20 GMT -5
So am I a liberal then levi? Or a conervative? BTW, I think this is one of your 1st post that don't have some kinda personal attack. GJ I do not think you are either liberal or conservative. I think you are a wingnut fundamentalist radical. I hope you don't construe that as a personal attack, but you asked me for my opinion.
|
|
marr
Worker
Posts: 169
|
Post by marr on Jan 7, 2008 10:56:01 GMT -5
|
|