Remember me
▼ Content

Going "Green"



Page 1 of 5123>>>
Going "Green"30-01-2021 15:43
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.
30-01-2021 17:01
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(569)
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


GM is making nothing but krap now, so they have to change something.

What fools do not understand is that if electric cars and trucks were mandated then every gas station becomes a charging station that will need to be as large as a football stadium parking lot to accommodate the vehicles requiring paving the entire USA.

The environmental impact will be enormous
Edited on 30-01-2021 17:12
30-01-2021 18:34
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
What the 'Greeners' fail to see, is that our power grid was designed over a hundred years ago, and slowly grew, and expanded, as demand increased. Power plants have some control over how much electricity they produce, and can switch in and out, to accommodate demand, and the have the means to anticipate those needs. Solar and wind power, screw that up, since there isn't much control over the power generated, or when. Solar doesn't work, if the sun ain't shining bright. Wind doesn't always blow. When the demand exceed the supply, there are blackouts, to reduce demand, and strain on the grid. Brownouts and Blackouts, really screw with electronics.

Battery charging takes time, unless you don't care about reducing the life expectancy. Price of batteries have been climbing for years, because of the demand, from people wanting to get in on the trendy Green movement early. Not sure if battery supply, can keep up with demand, if electric vehicles are mandated. Not many people are going to want to wait hours to charge a battery, and will go with the 'turbo' options, routinely, destroying their battery, needing replacement, at high cost, often. Adding to the already crippling demand. Cars aren't the only high demand, for the same batteries. People install the same batteries in their homes, and businesses, as backup power, since the grid isn't reliable, and a huge price difference between peek production, and peek demand.

It's not intended to grow the grid, electric supply, as needed. They are growing the demand first, and presuming supply will keep up. Not going to work out well. California has had blackout problems for decades, and can't see to keep up. What do the figure on doing with hockey-stick increase in demand? We do fine, because we currently have a lot of energy options, based on our needs, costs, and availability. Only one source, will be catastrophically crippling.
30-01-2021 19:05
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Fracking natural gas and reduced GDP are the easiest things to do to combat global warming.
30-01-2021 19:23
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
What we should be doing, is improving the energy supply, we are already dependent on, and adding on to it, to better service the already high demand. Any reduction in the supply and delivery, isn't progress, it's sabotage.
30-01-2021 21:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
keepit wrote: Fracking natural gas and reduced GDP are the easiest things to do to combat global warming.

What about fracking petroleum as well?


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2021 00:59
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
This is what will probably be used in the future. Advanced Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and radioactive waste is being reprocessed to get even more energy from it. Also, they say that a battery has been developed that can charge in the same amount of time as filling up your gas tank. And with the power plants, because of their small size, they might be able to be located closer to the end user.
One issue with a coal power plant is that it has to run 24 hours a day even if there is no demand.
The nuclear reactor;
https://www.energy.gov/ne/nuclear-reactor-technologies/small-modular-nuclear-reactors

The battery;
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/19/electric-car-batteries-race-ahead-with-five-minute-charging-times
31-01-2021 02:06
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
I remember reading about fusion reactors as a child. How we would have an unlimited energy source, cheap and clean... 50 years later... Is there even on fusion reactor operating commercially? Is there even one operating more than 73 seconds? Is there even one that produce electricity?
31-01-2021 03:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.


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
31-01-2021 03:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
keepit wrote:
Fracking natural gas and reduced GDP are the easiest things to do to combat global warming.

Define 'global warming'.


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
31-01-2021 03:37
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Fracking natural gas and reduced GDP are the easiest things to do to combat global warming.

What about fracking petroleum as well?


.


Fracking is done to rock, not petroleum or natural gas. No need to frack that.

Fracking as a drilling technique is good for finding oil (usually accompanied by natural gas), or water. It has even been used in gold mines, coal mines, and the mining and drilling for many other purposes. It has also been used in warfare, to penetrate fortifications and bunkers.

Heck, I used fracking the other day to install an electrical conduit under my front walk.


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
31-01-2021 03:38
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
IBD, I was thinking that all the power plants coming on line should be nat gas.
I think the cars should be hybrid which would cut petroleum consumption greatly.
31-01-2021 03:44
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.


Hey, don't bad mouth my electric truck! It's the the only RC ground vehicle that I found, that didn't get stuck. Cat still chases it occasionally. Battery last 15-20 minutes, which is okay, since I'm about done with it by then anyway. I've got a jeep, but I need to mow the grass, or it tends to bog down, even get stuck.
31-01-2021 04:31
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030
31-01-2021 05:52
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
HarveyH55 wrote: I remember reading about fusion reactors as a child. How we would have an unlimited energy source, cheap and clean... 50 years later... Is there even on fusion reactor operating commercially? Is there even one operating more than 73 seconds? Is there even one that produce electricity?

The bottom line is that an unlimited energy source is an international political hot potato. On the one hand, it's like the international space station, i.e. every country wants/needs to be in on it, for funding, international regulation and concern and for diplomacy ... but in whose country will the prototype be built. Which country gets to have physical control of the total game-changer.

Well, somehow ITER was being developed in France ... and there has been no end to the bickering and the squabbles and the pulling out of the agreement and the withdrawing of funding and it has gone nowhere.

... but progress was made up to building the complex and the reactor housing. The actual reactor itself doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

On the technical side, the grand problem to overcome is how they will be able to leverage uber-powerful magnets to repel the 100-million degree plasma and keep it from touching the walls, i.e. maintain a sufficient gap between the plasma and the wall and prevent physical contact. Thermal radiation of that temperature can be handled with rapid circulation of mega-large volumes of heavily chilled fluid ... but nothing can prevent total meltdown if there is contact with 100-million degree matter.

Of course, they can't even get to the point of addressing the technical hurdles while the politics have everything shut down. At present, my understanding is that they continue to generate a little revenue by hosting tours of ITER that wow onlookers with amazing technical grandeur and just don't mention that there is little chance of the reactor accomplishing what they are imagining anytime soon.

In Korea, they have a fusion reactor that exists only for research purposes, namely to see how hot they can make plasma and for how long they can hold it. They aren't really pushing to make electricity.



There you go.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2021 06:17
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: I remember reading about fusion reactors as a child. How we would have an unlimited energy source, cheap and clean... 50 years later... Is there even on fusion reactor operating commercially? Is there even one operating more than 73 seconds? Is there even one that produce electricity?

The bottom line is that an unlimited energy source is an international political hot potato. On the one hand, it's like the international space station, i.e. every country wants/needs to be in on it, for funding, international regulation and concern and for diplomacy ... but in whose country will the prototype be built. Which country gets to have physical control of the total game-changer.

Well, somehow ITER was being developed in France ... and there has been no end to the bickering and the squabbles and the pulling out of the agreement and the withdrawing of funding and it has gone nowhere.

... but progress was made up to building the complex and the reactor housing. The actual reactor itself doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

On the technical side, the grand problem to overcome is how they will be able to leverage uber-powerful magnets to repel the 100-million degree plasma and keep it from touching the walls, i.e. maintain a sufficient gap between the plasma and the wall and prevent physical contact. Thermal radiation of that temperature can be handled with rapid circulation of mega-large volumes of heavily chilled fluid ... but nothing can prevent total meltdown if there is contact with 100-million degree matter.

Of course, they can't even get to the point of addressing the technical hurdles while the politics have everything shut down. At present, my understanding is that they continue to generate a little revenue by hosting tours of ITER that wow onlookers with amazing technical grandeur and just don't mention that there is little chance of the reactor accomplishing what they are imagining anytime soon.

In Korea, they have a fusion reactor that exists only for research purposes, namely to see how hot they can make plasma and for how long they can hold it. They aren't really pushing to make electricity.



There you go.

.


North or South Korea?


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
31-01-2021 06:22
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
GasGuzzler wrote:North or South Korea?

It's in West Korea. Does that help? Definitely not in the East.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Edited on 31-01-2021 06:23
31-01-2021 06:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
keepit wrote:
IBD, I was thinking that all the power plants coming on line should be nat gas.
I think the cars should be hybrid which would cut petroleum consumption greatly.


You don't get to dictate to anyone what they drive. You are not the king.

Fascism never works.


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
31-01-2021 06:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
keepit wrote:I think the cars should be hybrid which would cut petroleum consumption greatly.

Why should we cut petroleum consumption at all?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2021 06:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.


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
31-01-2021 06:41
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: I remember reading about fusion reactors as a child. How we would have an unlimited energy source, cheap and clean... 50 years later... Is there even on fusion reactor operating commercially? Is there even one operating more than 73 seconds? Is there even one that produce electricity?

The bottom line is that an unlimited energy source is an international political hot potato. On the one hand, it's like the international space station, i.e. every country wants/needs to be in on it, for funding, international regulation and concern and for diplomacy ... but in whose country will the prototype be built. Which country gets to have physical control of the total game-changer.

Well, somehow ITER was being developed in France ... and there has been no end to the bickering and the squabbles and the pulling out of the agreement and the withdrawing of funding and it has gone nowhere.

... but progress was made up to building the complex and the reactor housing. The actual reactor itself doesn't look like it's going anywhere.

On the technical side, the grand problem to overcome is how they will be able to leverage uber-powerful magnets to repel the 100-million degree plasma and keep it from touching the walls, i.e. maintain a sufficient gap between the plasma and the wall and prevent physical contact. Thermal radiation of that temperature can be handled with rapid circulation of mega-large volumes of heavily chilled fluid ... but nothing can prevent total meltdown if there is contact with 100-million degree matter.

Of course, they can't even get to the point of addressing the technical hurdles while the politics have everything shut down. At present, my understanding is that they continue to generate a little revenue by hosting tours of ITER that wow onlookers with amazing technical grandeur and just don't mention that there is little chance of the reactor accomplishing what they are imagining anytime soon.

In Korea, they have a fusion reactor that exists only for research purposes, namely to see how hot they can make plasma and for how long they can hold it. They aren't really pushing to make electricity.



There you go.

.



They should consider that the Sun is only 5,778 kelvins. With what they're pursuing, they're going well beyond that.
31-01-2021 06:44
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.



When you consider the world's economy, innovation will need to be the answer. A lot of people are working at different things. And you are right, oil is a renewable source of energy. Natural gas might not be renewed as efficiently as oil, but.......
31-01-2021 12:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.



When you consider the world's economy, innovation will need to be the answer. A lot of people are working at different things. And you are right, oil is a renewable source of energy. Natural gas might not be renewed as efficiently as oil, but.......

Renewal is not about efficiency.


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
31-01-2021 16:41
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.



When you consider the world's economy, innovation will need to be the answer. A lot of people are working at different things. And you are right, oil is a renewable source of energy. Natural gas might not be renewed as efficiently as oil, but.......

Renewal is not about efficiency.



There's between 2 million and 3 million miles of natural gas pipelines. Gas companies are experimenting with hydrogen. This is because if everything goes away from natural gas or the demand for it decreases then that's help to maintain value in their assets.
31-01-2021 20:44
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.



When you consider the world's economy, innovation will need to be the answer. A lot of people are working at different things. And you are right, oil is a renewable source of energy. Natural gas might not be renewed as efficiently as oil, but.......

Renewal is not about efficiency.



There's between 2 million and 3 million miles of natural gas pipelines. Gas companies are experimenting with hydrogen. This is because if everything goes away from natural gas or the demand for it decreases then that's help to maintain value in their assets.


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...
31-01-2021 21:26
James___
★★★★★
(4525)
HarveyH55 wrote:


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...



If hydrogen is produced using wind turbines or solar panels, then it could be used as fuel for cars. Cost will dictate the market in the end. With that said, the cost of EV batteries vs a hydrogen fuel cell could make a difference one way or the other. I checked and if current usage remains constant, the US has a 90 year supply of natural gas.
31-01-2021 22:14
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(569)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...



If hydrogen is produced using wind turbines or solar panels, then it could be used as fuel for cars. Cost will dictate the market in the end. With that said, the cost of EV batteries vs a hydrogen fuel cell could make a difference one way or the other. I checked and if current usage remains constant, the US has a 90 year supply of natural gas.


So you do not mind that wind farms might drive many bird species into extinction
31-01-2021 22:39
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Harvey,
There's a funny joke about fusion power.
"Hydrogen fusion power his 20 years away and always will be.
I think they'll make it work though. Maybe they'll get luck with quantum tunneling.
01-02-2021 00:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
keepit wrote:I think they'll make [nuclear fusion] work though. Maybe they'll get luck with quantum tunneling.

Unfortunately, Quantum Tunneling is very ill-named and unfortunately screws with gullible, scientifically illiterate morons.

I have harped on this many times in this forum, i.e. you cannot just jump back and forth seamlessly between the quantum world and the macro world and expect everything to align.

Quantum mechanics is mathematics (specifcially statistical math and probability), not physics. If you fire an electron (quantum world) at a solid brick wall (macro world), there's a certain probability that the electron will fly right through it because at the quantum level, that brick wall is mostly empty space. Those who are happy to confuse mathematics with physics are happy to imagine that electrons somehow employ strange subspace magic to create mystical extra-dimensional portals, called "quantum tunnels" for passage through barriers that would otherwise block them.

A much more apropos name would be something similar to the earloop facemask filtration rating ... but for electrons filtering through matter. Of course such a name would remove all the mystery that empowers bullshitters to mentally prey on the scientifically illiterate and the mathematically incompetent.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-02-2021 00:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
GM is going to pursue a more carbon neutral policy which includes
exclusively offer electric light-duty cars and trucks by 2035
https://qz.com/1966116/electric-cars-will-speed-up-depreciation-of-everything-gm-owns/?utm_source=YPL

This is where improvements will need to be made in power generation. At the same time the nations electrical power grid might need to be updated.
This might also devalue oil quite a bit. And since China is trying to take over the South China Sea because of the oil below it, a possible war could be averted.


And where is all that new electrical power coming from? Why would anyone want a truck to be electric powered? Trucks often have to drive all day. They don't have time to recharge.



The link is to my post that answered your questions before you asked them.
https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/going-green-d6-e3511.php#post_68030


Personal nuclear reactors are impractical. People don't even maintain their cars, water heaters, furnaces, etc.

Putting a nuclear reactor in the home and fueling it? What could go wrong?!?
Fusion power is not available.

Uranium is not a renewable fuel. Neither is plutonium. Oil and natural gas are.



When you consider the world's economy, innovation will need to be the answer. A lot of people are working at different things. And you are right, oil is a renewable source of energy. Natural gas might not be renewed as efficiently as oil, but.......

Renewal is not about efficiency.



There's between 2 million and 3 million miles of natural gas pipelines. Gas companies are experimenting with hydrogen. This is because if everything goes away from natural gas or the demand for it decreases then that's help to maintain value in their assets.

Few people use hydrogen for fuel, and that's for a reason.

Hydrogen has a low BTU. It has to be manufactured, since hydrogen doesn't occur naturally in quantities sufficient to be used as a practical fuel. This makes hydrogen expensive.

Hydrogen is a smaller molecule. It will leak through piping easier. It's tough enough piping natural gas around.


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
01-02-2021 00:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...



If hydrogen is produced using wind turbines or solar panels, then it could be used as fuel for cars. Cost will dictate the market in the end. With that said, the cost of EV batteries vs a hydrogen fuel cell could make a difference one way or the other. I checked and if current usage remains constant, the US has a 90 year supply of natural gas.


Major loss of efficiency. The piddle power that wind generates or that solar panels generate will lose even more efficiency by using that power to separate out hydrogen. The BTU you get from the hydrogen will be far less than the power you get from using the wind or solar panels directly.

Even as a ballasting system, hydrogen production is a pretty lousy way to go.


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
01-02-2021 00:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15565)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...



If hydrogen is produced using wind turbines or solar panels, then it could be used as fuel for cars. Cost will dictate the market in the end. With that said, the cost of EV batteries vs a hydrogen fuel cell could make a difference one way or the other. I checked and if current usage remains constant, the US has a 90 year supply of natural gas.


So you do not mind that wind farms might drive many bird species into extinction

Why would they?


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
01-02-2021 00:39
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
Swan wrote: So you do not mind that wind farms might drive many bird species into extinction

LOL That's exactly why I'm opposed to mailboxes, fence posts and French baguettes LOL.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-02-2021 00:53
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
IBD,
I'm not specifically familiar with "subspace and extra dimensions" explanation of quantum tunneling.
I like the explanation of matter continually materializing and dematerializing and in that way occasionally matter moves from beyond a "wall" to the other side of that wall.
01-02-2021 01:11
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3401)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:


Hydrogen has always had interesting potential, since it one of the most plentiful, and the simplest element. Unfortunately, most of it is already attached to other elements, a getting it separated, to use for something else, isn't free. Fossil fuels come out of the ground, ready to use. Some refinement is done, to reduce them down to other products, remove a few things, less desirable. make them burn consistently, and ship just the part needed, for the intended purpose.

Back in the 90s, hydrogen cars were a rage. There were a lot of scams, for separating water, off current from the existing alternator. You only need a quick jolt, to start your car, the battery recharges pretty quick, but that alternator keeps spinning, producing electricity. Seems likely, you could just use that 'free' electricity, to separate water, then inject the Brown gas into the carburetor, and burn it. You could easily reduce fuel consumption, and it should have been possible to run the entire car, off of water. I was on an electronics forum through that trend, and it was why I moved on. A new thread, at least weekly, seeking help, because they could seem to get any results, from the kit they bought on the internet. They either still hadn't figure out, consistently, which end of the soldering iron to pick up, or which parts are which, even with pictures. Mostly, they weren't saving much, or anything at the pump. They wanted to get better production of the Brown gas, with no understanding of electronics, or interest in learning. Most seem to be lacking a proper education, in general, and only wanted to argue about what was possible.

Most likely the oil companies, are just scamming for federal funding, and trying to calm and reassure investors. There is a believable enough potential, it sold well before...



If hydrogen is produced using wind turbines or solar panels, then it could be used as fuel for cars. Cost will dictate the market in the end. With that said, the cost of EV batteries vs a hydrogen fuel cell could make a difference one way or the other. I checked and if current usage remains constant, the US has a 90 year supply of natural gas.


Isn't Natural Gas, methane? And isn't methane the gas you emit, when you eat a Taco Bell? I'm not sure if you can run a car, off a crap-sack...

Doesn't really matter where you get the electricity, you spend more energy separating water molecules, and compressing the gas, than you can hope to recover by burning it. Hydrogen fuels cells, are a neat, proof-of-concept, but are expensive, and really aren't as good, as they are being marketed. More of something that works, as long as the government funding holds out, type of thing.
01-02-2021 01:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
keepit wrote: I like the explanation of matter continually materializing and dematerializing

Matter does not continually materialize and dematerialize. We have no reason to believe that it does.

keepit wrote: and in that way occasionally matter moves from beyond a "wall" to the other side of that wall.

It's not hard to understand how elementary particles can pass through empty space. Are you having difficulty imagining that?

Occam's Razor cuts away your gosh-awful model of undefined and unnecessary materialization/dematerialization. Matter at the quantum level is mostly empty space and elementary particles are themselves very small, actually.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-02-2021 02:06
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(569)
keepit wrote:
IBD,
I'm not specifically familiar with "subspace and extra dimensions" explanation of quantum tunneling.
I like the explanation of matter continually materializing and dematerializing and in that way occasionally matter moves from beyond a "wall" to the other side of that wall.


100 trillion neutrinos pass thru your body every second
01-02-2021 02:29
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Swan,
Neutrinos aren't involved as far as i know.
It isn't about atoms being mostly empty space and particles being very small.
It's about energy and the ability of particle to make it through energy that pushes back on particles. Protons being positively charged is a good example of resistance to coming together (positive charges repel each other).
What it is, is almost magical but has been proven.
For example, in the sun , the temperature isn't high enough for protons to overcome the resistance to protons coming together. Yet they do. It isn't a frequent occurrence for any particular set of protons but there are so many protons in the sun that even occasionally, the number of protons coming together is a very big number, a big enough number to produce the energy leaving the sun and heading towards earth and other places.
What you might try to understand is that even though you don't understand this or that, there are professional scientists that do. Quantum tunneling is a good example.
01-02-2021 02:41
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(569)
keepit wrote:
Swan,
Neutrinos aren't involved as far as i know.
It isn't about atoms being mostly empty space and particles being very small.
It's about energy and the ability of particle to make it through energy that pushes back on particles. Protons being positively charged is a good example of resistance to coming together (positive charges repel each other).
What it is, is almost magical but has been proven.
For example, in the sun , the temperature isn't high enough for protons to overcome the resistance to protons coming together. Yet they do. It isn't a frequent occurrence for any particular set of protons but there are so many protons in the sun that even occasionally, the number of protons coming together is a very big number, a big enough number to produce the energy leaving the sun and heading towards earth and other places.
What you might try to understand is that even though you don't understand this or that, there are professional scientists that do. Quantum tunneling is a good example.


I hate to be blunt, but I have left professional scientist, or so they thought in my dust cloud

I merely said that trillions of neutrinos are passing thru you now. Not even sure what you are trying to say about protons that are part of everything
01-02-2021 02:43
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9192)
keepit wrote:Swan, Neutrinos aren't involved as far as i know.

You don't know anything in the first place.

keepit wrote: It isn't about atoms being mostly empty space

You are a moron. It's not that atoms are mostly empty space; it's that matter is mostly empty space. There is a large relative distance between atoms, with even greater distance between molecules.

keepit wrote: What it is, is almost magical but has been proven.

Like I said, you don't know anything in the first place. You are only in it for the religion and the mysticism. Rarely do people butcher, and then romanticize, mathematics such as you are doing, and then claim that "professional scientists" understand the brainfart of your mathematical incompetence.

keepit wrote:For example, in the sun , the temperature isn't high enough for protons to overcome the resistance to protons coming together.

OK, I'm leaving now.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Page 1 of 5123>>>





Join the debate Going "Green":

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Green Hydrogen Survey for scientific research602-12-2020 18:37
Climate change in green land4204-04-2020 00:41
Forget New Green Deal, Let's make BIS(Basic Infrastructure And Service) Free.1215-01-2020 20:30
Year Long, Arctic Climate Change Study... How 'Green'?121-09-2019 03:46
The Real, 'Green New Deal'419-08-2019 02:52
▲ 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