Remember me
▼ Content

Gargantuan sluice gate in Gulf Stream to warm Europe, lower nat gas need


Gargantuan sluice gate in Gulf Stream to warm Europe, lower nat gas need06-04-2022 20:16
CurtJonas
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
The Gulf Stream has some effect on warming Europe. Apparently, it's minor but it DOES do a lot to warm the west coast of Norway. Somewhere off the West coast of Ireland the Gulf Stream splits into 2 streams where the northern stream does that warming bit on Norway and the southern stream has only a mild effect on western Europe. What if, using off the shelf tech, humanity could build a massive sluice gate (design below) in the middle of that fork and guide more of the Gulf Stream to the southern branch and warm up Europe. Only a half a degree or so in the winter could cut nat gas and coal usage considerably.

Crazy right? And probable unforseen environmental impacts would make it politically tough. But if it could work, we'd get less fossil fuel use in the winter (thus less Putin), less greenhouse gas and maybe cool off Norway and part of the Artic a bit. Then the "gate" could be disabled for summer to reduce the negative environmental effects.

"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.
07-04-2022 01:47
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4440)
CurtJonas wrote:
The Gulf Stream has some effect on warming Europe. Apparently, it's minor but it DOES do a lot to warm the west coast of Norway. Somewhere off the West coast of Ireland the Gulf Stream splits into 2 streams where the northern stream does that warming bit on Norway and the southern stream has only a mild effect on western Europe. What if, using off the shelf tech, humanity could build a massive sluice gate (design below) in the middle of that fork and guide more of the Gulf Stream to the southern branch and warm up Europe. Only a half a degree or so in the winter could cut nat gas and coal usage considerably.

Crazy right? And probable unforseen environmental impacts would make it politically tough. But if it could work, we'd get less fossil fuel use in the winter (thus less Putin), less greenhouse gas and maybe cool off Norway and part of the Artic a bit. Then the "gate" could be disabled for summer to reduce the negative environmental effects.

"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.


Why do you hate Norwegians? They are basically frozen much of the year. Why deny them what little 'warming' nature provides.

Nature is a balancing-act, seeks equilibrium. It's very dynamic, always in motion. The scale gets tipped on one side, or the other, constantly. You will never get what you want, nature doesn't care about humans. It's a big planet, more important things to do. Kind of like Europeans don't care about Norwegians, only on a global scale...
07-04-2022 02:21
James_
★★★★☆
(1140)
HarveyH55 wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:
The Gulf Stream has some effect on warming Europe. Apparently, it's minor but it DOES do a lot to warm the west coast of Norway. Somewhere off the West coast of Ireland the Gulf Stream splits into 2 streams where the northern stream does that warming bit on Norway and the southern stream has only a mild effect on western Europe. What if, using off the shelf tech, humanity could build a massive sluice gate (design below) in the middle of that fork and guide more of the Gulf Stream to the southern branch and warm up Europe. Only a half a degree or so in the winter could cut nat gas and coal usage considerably.

Crazy right? And probable unforseen environmental impacts would make it politically tough. But if it could work, we'd get less fossil fuel use in the winter (thus less Putin), less greenhouse gas and maybe cool off Norway and part of the Artic a bit. Then the "gate" could be disabled for summer to reduce the negative environmental effects.

"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.


Why do you hate Norwegians? They are basically frozen much of the year. Why deny them what little 'warming' nature provides.

Nature is a balancing-act, seeks equilibrium. It's very dynamic, always in motion. The scale gets tipped on one side, or the other, constantly. You will never get what you want, nature doesn't care about humans. It's a big planet, more important things to do. Kind of like Europeans don't care about Norwegians, only on a global scale...


While Norwegians might be "frozen solid", you're limp most of the year.
07-04-2022 07:43
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4440)
James_ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:
The Gulf Stream has some effect on warming Europe. Apparently, it's minor but it DOES do a lot to warm the west coast of Norway. Somewhere off the West coast of Ireland the Gulf Stream splits into 2 streams where the northern stream does that warming bit on Norway and the southern stream has only a mild effect on western Europe. What if, using off the shelf tech, humanity could build a massive sluice gate (design below) in the middle of that fork and guide more of the Gulf Stream to the southern branch and warm up Europe. Only a half a degree or so in the winter could cut nat gas and coal usage considerably.

Crazy right? And probable unforseen environmental impacts would make it politically tough. But if it could work, we'd get less fossil fuel use in the winter (thus less Putin), less greenhouse gas and maybe cool off Norway and part of the Artic a bit. Then the "gate" could be disabled for summer to reduce the negative environmental effects.

"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.


Why do you hate Norwegians? They are basically frozen much of the year. Why deny them what little 'warming' nature provides.

Nature is a balancing-act, seeks equilibrium. It's very dynamic, always in motion. The scale gets tipped on one side, or the other, constantly. You will never get what you want, nature doesn't care about humans. It's a big planet, more important things to do. Kind of like Europeans don't care about Norwegians, only on a global scale...


While Norwegians might be "frozen solid", you're limp most of the year.


How would you know? Men don't excite me, like they do for you...
07-04-2022 15:36
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James_ wrote:
While Norwegians might be "frozen solid", you're limp most of the year.

How would you know? Men don't excite me, like they do for you...

Look, to each their own, but if either of you is turned on by the smell of doody, then I know some fairy nice boys who will let you play with their wet spots.

PM me your email address if interested.


Edited on 07-04-2022 15:36
07-04-2022 19:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
CurtJonas wrote:
The Gulf Stream has some effect on warming Europe.

The Gulf Stream doesn't go anywhere near Europe.
CurtJonas wrote:
Apparently, it's minor but it DOES do a lot to warm the west coast of Norway.

The Gulf Stream doesn't go near Norway.
CurtJonas wrote:
Somewhere off the West coast of Ireland the Gulf Stream splits into 2 streams where the northern stream does that warming bit on Norway and the southern stream has only a mild effect on western Europe.

The Gulf Stream doesn't go near Ireland, Norway, or anywhere else in Europe.
CurtJonas wrote:
What if, using off the shelf tech, humanity could build a massive sluice gate (design below) in the middle of that fork and guide more of the Gulf Stream to the southern branch and warm up Europe. Only a half a degree or so in the winter could cut nat gas and coal usage considerably.

A sluice gate??? On a current that doesn't exist at the location you specify?????
CurtJonas wrote:
Crazy right? And probable unforseen environmental impacts would make it politically tough. But if it could work, we'd get less fossil fuel use in the winter

Fossils aren't used for fuel. Fossils don't burn.
CurtJonas wrote:
(thus less Putin), less greenhouse gas

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You can't make energy out of nothing.
CurtJonas wrote:
and maybe cool off Norway and part of the Artic a bit.

You want to make them colder??
CurtJonas wrote:
Then the "gate" could be disabled for summer to reduce the negative environmental effects.

What 'negative environmental effects'?
CurtJonas wrote:
"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.

You'll sink the ships. The whole mess will just drag along the bottom with whatever current is there. In this case, it will be the North Atlantic Drift (a cold current).


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 07-04-2022 20:30
RE: Sluice Gate14-04-2022 05:38
CurtJonas
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
To HarveyH55 ... Huuunnnh .... Norwegians may prefer to see their climate returned to traditional coolness. Certainly the polar bears and other sea creatures will enjoy the return of sea ice.
14-04-2022 05:53
CurtJonas
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
Into the Night: Maybe try this link if you truly care to debate. And I do agree that the engineering challenge might be impossible (but some bright ME out there may agree with me that it's at least worth the study, my guess is that the ships would NOT sink ... they're meant to hold 300,000 TONs of oil, so why not a deep steel wall?) :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream.
14-04-2022 10:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
CurtJonas wrote:
To HarveyH55 ... Huuunnnh .... Norwegians may prefer to see their climate returned to traditional coolness. Certainly the polar bears and other sea creatures will enjoy the return of sea ice.

Define 'traditional coolness'.

The Arctic isn't melting.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-04-2022 10:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
CurtJonas wrote:
Into the Night: Maybe try this link if you truly care to debate.

No. You cannot use Wikipedia as a reference with me. It is too often badly written or just plain wrong. It is also biased.
CurtJonas wrote:
And I do agree that the engineering challenge might be impossible
It is.
CurtJonas wrote:
(but some bright ME out there may agree with me that it's at least worth the study, my guess is that the ships would NOT sink ... they're meant to hold 300,000 TONs of oil,
No. They hold about 9000 tons of oil, and ONLY if the weight is distributed evenly.
CurtJonas wrote:
so why not a deep steel wall?) :

A single plate of steel section like that weighs approx. 58,000 tons. That weight would NOT be distributed evenly. Also, no cable or winch could handle the weight, and no attachment method of such would hold in the steel against such weight. The effect would be to pull the ship right over and capsize it, thus sinking it.

Further, there is no anchor. The wall has nothing to hold it in place against the pressure of ANY current.

A mid-ocean dam would not stop any current anyway. It would just go around the dam.

The Gulf Stream doesn't go anywhere near Norway or Europe.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 14-04-2022 11:02
14-04-2022 15:17
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
CurtJonas wrote:
"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.

Wouldn't the gate have to go from the bottom of the ocean to the top to make any difference?
14-04-2022 16:14
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12987)
CurtJonas wrote:To HarveyH55 ... Huuunnnh .... Norwegians may prefer to see their climate returned to traditional coolness.

Norway appears to be getting colder :

Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link!


https://watchers.news/2020/07/29/norway-records-coldest-summer-in-nearly-60-years/

CurtJonas wrote: Certainly the polar bears and other sea creatures will enjoy the return of sea ice.

You should talk to a polar bear. Any one will do. They all know that the sea ice returns every year around the same time.

.
Attached image:

14-04-2022 19:09
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:
"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.

Wouldn't the gate have to go from the bottom of the ocean to the top to make any difference?

It actually wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Imagine, if you will, if you just plopped Hoover dam just off the coast of L.A. to prevent water from getting to the beach. What would happen?

The water just goes around the dam and reaches the beach anyway.

The reason Hoover dam can hold back water at all is because of the solid rock on either side that the dam is anchored into. That rock is what keeps the river on it's course and is what keeps Lake Mead where it is.

But in the open ocean, there is no such rock. With nothing to stop the water, it just flows around the dam. It's no more than a large stone in the river.

The average depth of the ocean is about 2.5 miles down. A steel plate 100 ft across and reaching that depth and 1 inch thick would weigh 58,000 tons. No cable or winch can handle that kind of weight. Further, any cable attachment to such a piece would simply tear through the metal like thin aluminum foil under that kind of weight. To give you an idea of that, imagine suspending an entire pallet of aluminum foil by using a string tied through a single sheet in one of the boxes.

All this to stop a current that doesn't even exist in that location.

Curt is not thinking clearly.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-04-2022 19:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
IBdaMann wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:To HarveyH55 ... Huuunnnh .... Norwegians may prefer to see their climate returned to traditional coolness.

Norway appears to be getting colder :

Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link! Holy Link!


https://watchers.news/2020/07/29/norway-records-coldest-summer-in-nearly-60-years/

CurtJonas wrote: Certainly the polar bears and other sea creatures will enjoy the return of sea ice.

You should talk to a polar bear. Any one will do. They all know that the sea ice returns every year around the same time.

.


While a nice attempt, remember that it is not possible to measure the temperature of Norway.

Polar bears, like any bear, hibernate through the winter (when the polar ice is solid). They wake up in spring (hungry as bears!) and swim out among the ice floes for their food (seals and such lounging on the ice floes, now rather trapped from getting away quickly).

Mothers with cubs can't go out there like that, so hunt along the shore. Often, polar bears will just wander into town and forage in the garbage.

In Anchorage, AK, at the Sheraton hotel, you will find a stuffed polar bear in the lobby. He's there because he walked into the hotel, and the clerk shot him...with a pistol no less! (it was a .45)

The Dept of Natural Resources flies a plane around each year to make a count of polar bears. The population is increasing. Some seem to be coming in from Canada, as polar bears will wander along the shore following their food (fish, seals, etc).

The only polar bears in Norway are at the northern end of the island of Spitsbergen, about 400 miles from the north coast of the mainland of Norway. That's about 80 deg N latitude (just 10 deg from the north pole).


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-04-2022 19:30
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
The average depth of the ocean is about 2.5 miles down.

See that is what I was getting at. It's a cool idea but how could you build a 2.5 mile gate?

Seems kinda like a stairway to heaven thing.

14-04-2022 22:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
The average depth of the ocean is about 2.5 miles down.

See that is what I was getting at. It's a cool idea but how could you build a 2.5 mile gate?

Seems kinda like a stairway to heaven thing.


Better song. I don't think anyone wrote a song about 58,000 tons under the sea.



The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
15-04-2022 17:40
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
Better song. I don't think anyone wrote a song about 58,000 tons under the sea.

Ha, ha... no. I learned about Led Zeplin from the prof. He liked Aro Smith and Janis Joplin too (I'm working on my spelling IBM). Stairway was one of my favorites and I would listen to it through headphones while I did my chores.

i always loved this pic - wished i had long hair like that
18-04-2022 21:57
CurtJonas
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
GretaGroupie wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:
"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.

Wouldn't the gate have to go from the bottom of the ocean to the top to make any difference?


Good question "Groupie" ... I can't say for sure as I don't know enough about the Gulf Stream and its depth. I HAVE seen where it averages about 3200 feet in depth. So yeah, it's deep and a "wall" would weigh a lot but maybe not like another responder here suggests as it could be partly concrete or have bouyant material attached. My sense is that it's possible but might cause too much disruption to the ecosystem etc. for too little gain in heat for Europe. (But it should be quick to reverse in those cases ... not meant to be a permanent fixture).
RE: Sluice Gate18-04-2022 22:26
CurtJonas
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
[quote]Into the Night wrote:


A mid-ocean dam would not stop any current anyway. It would just go around the dam.


Yeah "Night" ... I didn't have a better image for something to GUIDE the flow more southerly but I chose "sluice gate" which does sound like a dam ... bad choice maybe.

It would work more like a bar of sand does in a river ... how the sandbar, when parallel to the flow, can send the flow more to one side or the other. So, you're right when you say, "It would just go around," only I say "nudge it a bit more southerly (i.e. angle it) and you won't need as strong of achoring as you suggest.

Also, I doubt whether you'd need plate steel as thick as you say plus, why not attach flotation if it's so darn heavy. Also I think you've got the weight of oil mixed up with the number of barrels in a VLCC. Maybe you'll trust "Britanicca" over wikipedia?:

https://www.britannica.com/technology/very-large-crude-carrier
19-04-2022 00:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
CurtJonas wrote:
GretaGroupie wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:
"Sluice gate" design: Put 15 or 20 enormous VLCC ships end to end (about 5 miles worth), suspend prefabbed concrete or steel walls down to near the ocean bottom and use cable and drill rig anchoring systems to "pull" the "gate" into position.

Wouldn't the gate have to go from the bottom of the ocean to the top to make any difference?


Good question "Groupie" ... I can't say for sure as I don't know enough about the Gulf Stream and its depth. I HAVE seen where it averages about 3200 feet in depth. So yeah, it's deep and a "wall" would weigh a lot but maybe not like another responder here suggests as it could be partly concrete or have bouyant material attached.

You don't know about materials either. Concrete isn't buoyant. No anchor either. It also has very little tensile strength.
CurtJonas wrote:
My sense is that it's possible but might cause too much disruption to the ecosystem etc. for too little gain in heat for Europe.

Heat is not contained in anything. The Gulf Stream doesn't go anywhere near Europe.
CurtJonas wrote:
(But it should be quick to reverse in those cases ... not meant to be a permanent fixture).

You are ignoring the engineering problems involved or how useless such a project would be or even the location of the Gulf Stream.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 19-04-2022 00:54
19-04-2022 00:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
CurtJonas wrote:
[quote]Into the Night wrote:


A mid-ocean dam would not stop any current anyway. It would just go around the dam.


Yeah "Night" ... I didn't have a better image for something to GUIDE the flow more southerly but I chose "sluice gate" which does sound like a dam ... bad choice maybe.

It would work more like a bar of sand does in a river ... how the sandbar, when parallel to the flow, can send the flow more to one side or the other.

Sand bars don't 'send current' anywhere. They are deposited (and destroyed again) by the river itself.
CurtJonas wrote:
So, you're right when you say, "It would just go around," only I say "nudge it a bit more southerly (i.e. angle it) and you won't need as strong of achoring as you suggest.

A sandbar is a pile of sand. Firmly anchored. A river is just a few feet deep (maybe a hundred or so maximum). An ocean is a good 12,500 ft deep (over much of the area of the ocean).
CurtJonas wrote:
Also, I doubt whether you'd need plate steel as thick as you say plus,

I used 1 inch thick steel for my calculations. It's probably not thick enough.
CurtJonas wrote:
why not attach flotation if it's so darn heavy.

No anchor means it won't stay in one place. No sides means it will be meaningless. Any current just goes around it (assuming you COULD anchor it). With no anchor, it just moves with the current.
CurtJonas wrote:
Also I think you've got the weight of oil mixed up with the number of barrels in a VLCC. Maybe you'll trust "Britanicca" over wikipedia?:
https://www.britannica.com/technology/very-large-crude-carrier

Unrelated reference.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 19-04-2022 00:49
19-04-2022 15:54
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
CurtJonas wrote:So yeah, it's deep and a "wall" would weigh a lot but maybe not like another responder here suggests as it could be partly concrete or have bouyant material attached.

Maybe they could make it out of recicled plastic and it would be good for the environment too.


20-04-2022 20:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
CurtJonas wrote:So yeah, it's deep and a "wall" would weigh a lot but maybe not like another responder here suggests as it could be partly concrete or have bouyant material attached.

Maybe they could make it out of recicled plastic and it would be good for the environment too.

Not enough plastic and not strong enough. Plastic in the ocean actually doesn't last that long (despite the press you constantly hear about it). Bacteria eat it. It's the same bacteria that eats oil slicks.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 20-04-2022 20:13
21-04-2022 16:58
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
It's the same bacteria that eats oil slicks.

Don't bacteria get sick if they eat oil?

My father threw gasoline at me once and some got in my mouth and I trhew up all over and could not eat.


22-04-2022 02:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
It's the same bacteria that eats oil slicks.

Don't bacteria get sick if they eat oil?

Nah.To them it's food.

Lots of critters eat stuff you wouldn't dream of even touching. Flies, for example, love to suck up juices from a nice rotten piece of meat. They lay their eggs in it too, so the maggots have something to eat.

Lizards eat bugs
Roadrunners eat lizards.

GretaGroupie wrote:
My father threw gasoline at me once and some got in my mouth and I trhew up all over and could not eat.

What a jerk. I understand your reaction to getting doused by gasoline.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
22-04-2022 16:49
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
Nah.To them it's food.

But oil is not a plant or an animal so it is not alive?


22-04-2022 18:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Nah.To them it's food.

But oil is not a plant or an animal so it is not alive?


Doesn't have to be. It's a source of energy. That makes it food for organisms that can make use of it.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 17:41
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
Doesn't have to be. It's a source of energy. That makes it food for organisms that can make use of it.

Oh I thought it had to be a plant or animal.

Can they eat gasoline too?


25-04-2022 23:09
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19799)
GretaGroupie wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Doesn't have to be. It's a source of energy. That makes it food for organisms that can make use of it.

Oh I thought it had to be a plant or animal.

Can they eat gasoline too?

Yes.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-04-2022 18:14
GretaGroupieProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(350)
Into the Night wrote:
GretaGroupie wrote:
Can they eat gasoline too?

Yes.

Why dont the bugs eat all the oil in the ground and then there would be no gasoline?






Join the debate Gargantuan sluice gate in Gulf Stream to warm Europe, lower nat gas need:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Biden white house selling oil to chinka while Americans suffer the highest gas prices ever023-07-2022 04:07
Nitrate Reduction - Powerful Greenhouse Gas Emission AND Alkalinity8812-05-2022 03:11
Donald J. Trump -- gas prices1012-03-2022 01:23
This is How the European Commission Classifies Nuclear Energy and Gas to Be 'Green'205-02-2022 04:07
The End Of The US Petrol Dollar: Fair Solution For Global Energy Crisis Of Oil Gas309-01-2022 16:51
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact