re: Alternative fuels

Space/Science » in reply to re: Alternative fuels

re: Alternative fuels

ljk — 4/26/2006 6:25:54 PM (archived)

I am definitely pro-nuclear power, along with solar, wind, and whatever
else works either today or hopefully soon (c'mon fusion and antimatter!).
And let's start thinking Zero Point Energy, while we're at it. How hard
can it be to tap into the quantum spaces between matter?

I am no fan of radical environmentalist attitudes. Especially when I can
recall hearing from several of them in the past saying how Earth would be
better off without humans on it. And that would help us how? Not to
mention Earth life got it pretty bad 65 and 220 million years ago (and
probably other eras) when it didn't have anyone around who had the
brains and technology to deflect errant space rocks. And whenever I
hear them or anyone else say we should be spending money for the
space program on Earth matters... that's it for me.

Had to do something to turn this thread towards space.

But it is rather hard to sympathize with companies making $100 billion
in annual profits and can give $400 million to their retiring CEO. Gosh,
I hope he can scrape by on it.

What it comes down to is, I will be surprised if we have enough fossil
fuels left to use to maintain our civilization in the next century or two.
If we don't start doing something long before then, it won't matter
who is to blame. And unless we are off this planet in decent numbers
by then, it really won't matter.

Singularity, where are you?!

The whole thread (42 posts)

Alternative fuels - Tom Brosz - 4/26/2006 6:21:43 AM
- Liquid coal - SteveS - 4/28/2006 1:46:53 AM
- re: Alternative fuels - Sawyer - 4/26/2006 2:51:57 PM
  - re: Alternative fuels - JimO - 4/26/2006 3:08:41 PM
- Insurance costs more than gas - SDF - 4/26/2006 10:06:51 AM
  - $250 a month for insurance! Where do you live? Iraq? (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 4/26/2006 3:15:22 PM
    - That's nothing - SDF - 4/26/2006 5:24:03 PM
      - What have you got for a damage deductible? Keep that high. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 4/26/2006 6:01:46 PM
        
        Find me an all-season, all-weather vehicle that costs less than $100/mth, all costs included - SDF - 4/26/2006 10:55:28 PM
        
        Nothing useful in all weather is going to be that cheap. - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2006 1:20:31 AM
      - Geez... - Tom Brosz - 4/26/2006 6:01:02 PM
      - re: That's nothing - Lance - 4/26/2006 5:26:46 PM
        
        In Australia - nick hoffman - 4/27/2006 10:26:07 PM
        
        That's $333/mth for insurance, a full one-third more than I would have to pay (n/t) - SDF - 4/26/2006 5:31:29 PM
        
        Actually, $333/mth US converts to $375/mth Canadian, that's 1.5-times what I would have to pay (n/t) - SDF - 4/26/2006 5:37:08 PM
- re: Alternative fuels - nick hoffman - 4/26/2006 8:57:56 AM
  - re: Alternative fuels - Lance - 4/26/2006 5:19:21 PM
    - re: Alternative fuels - ljk - 4/26/2006 5:38:09 PM
      - re: Alternative fuels - Lance - 4/26/2006 6:16:42 PM
      - re: Alternative fuels - Tom Brosz - 4/26/2006 6:15:50 PM
        
        re: Alternative fuels - ljk - 4/26/2006 6:25:54 PM
        
        Quantum energy - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2006 1:22:08 AM
        
        5 x 10^113 J/m^3 - Adam - 4/27/2006 12:12:12 PM
        
        enough Worlds??? - Adam - 4/27/2006 10:53:24 PM
        
        Only the lowest energy state is manifested (i.e. Ours) - SDF - 4/28/2006 2:52:12 AM
        
        :) Can you back this up? (n/t) - R.L. - 4/29/2006 6:52:15 AM
        
        Which part? Why cars rust? - SDF - 4/30/2006 4:20:35 AM
        
        Prove it.... - R.L. - 4/30/2006 5:10:01 AM
  - What about burning carbon dust? - REB - 4/26/2006 5:15:18 PM
    - We have laws against perpetual motion machines. (n/t) - alcaray - 4/27/2006 4:09:24 PM
      - Not a perpetual motion machine. There is energy input to get the carbon from the CO2 - REB - 4/27/2006 5:18:09 PM
        
        re: Not a perpetual motion machine. There is energy input to get the carbon from the CO2 - alcaray - 4/27/2006 9:05:54 PM
        
        re: Not a perpetual motion machine. There is energy input to get the carbon from the CO2 - REB - 4/28/2006 12:06:55 PM
        
        rREb, you are wrong about the energy imbalance of refining - nick hoffman - 4/29/2006 6:46:57 AM
        
        To be fair - nick hoffman - 4/27/2006 10:22:08 PM
    - No... - R.L. - 4/27/2006 8:13:44 AM
      - You are essentially advocating 'burning' CO2 to create CO2 - R.L. - 4/27/2006 8:21:15 AM
        
        Conservation of energy? We put more energy into finding, getting, transporting and refining oil than we get out of it by burning it in our cars. - REB - 4/27/2006 1:00:27 PM
    - Try this link. - REB - 4/26/2006 5:17:22 PM
      - One more time - REB - 4/26/2006 5:19:31 PM
  - Milestone Achieved in the Development of Biological Fuel Cells - ljk - 4/26/2006 2:28:22 PM
    - The End of Oil? - ljk - 4/27/2006 2:00:51 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (42 posts)