The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: BradGuth on 4 Oct 2007 16:17 On Oct 4, 8:43 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 08:05:18 -0700,BradGuth<bradg...(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > >On Oct 3, 5:31 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> > >wrote: > >> BradGuthwrote: > >> > John Larkin wrote: > >> > >Willie.Moo...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > >> > > >THE ANSWER - LOW COST HYDROGEN FROM SUNLIGHT > > >> > > >One simple solution I have is to reduce the cost of photovoltaics to > >> > > >less than 7 cents a peak watt - and use that DC power to produce > >> > > >hydrogen from DI water at very los cost. Then store that hydrogen in > >> > > >empty oil wells - about 100 day supply is needed for a stable national > >> > > >hydrogen supply system.. > > >> > > 7 cents a watt would be wonderful, but it's about 30:1 away from what > >> > > anybody is doing, even at the research level. And if we had such > >> > > power, the first rational use is to dump it into the grid, not convert > >> > > it to hydrogen at absurd net efficiency. > > >> > > Low cost solar would be great, but there's no particular link to > >> > > hydrogen. Too many "advanced" energy concepts are predicated on > >> > > ultra-cheap solar power, cheap enough to waste prodigiously. That > >> > > ain't gonna happen. > > >> > And your plan of action for the wasting of such spare/surplus clean > >> > energy is ???? > > >> There is no 'spare energy' nor is there ever likely to be. Simple economics will > >> prevent it. > > >You mean that Yids and others of your kind will prevent it. Trust me, > >we understand. > > It's remarkable how little you do understand. > > It's easy to imagine things when you are unencumbered by numbers. > > And what's this "Yid" obsession about? That makes as little sense as > the rest of your ravings. You're not even from Earth, so how would you know or care otherwise? Your black hole of insurmountable naysayism is so in denial that it's fully understandable as to why you'd knowingly work on behalf of the likes of big energy, or GW Bush or for that matter Hitler. - Brad Guth -
From: jimp on 4 Oct 2007 16:35 In sci.physics John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highnotlandthistechnologypart.com> wrote: > On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 20:35:03 GMT, jimp(a)specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >Squirting LOX into a cylinder will tend to cool everything off > >rather quickly, and perhaps too quickly. > Rocket engines don't seem to mind. > John Rocket engines are continuous. In internal combustion engines, the fire goes on and off. I'm just wondering out loud what happens to the metal parts which will be rather hot when hit with LOX. Will thermal stress cracks be an issue? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.
From: John Larkin on 4 Oct 2007 16:43 On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 12:45:06 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >A sufficient mass production of those 100+ meter towers, along with >their wind turbine driven generators plus whatever extent of the best >available PVs that can also take advantage of each given tower without >devouring or otherwise contaminating precious surface ground area >seems entirely worth our doing, I get it. The solar cells have more output when they're closer to the sun. Good idea. John
From: jimp on 4 Oct 2007 16:45 In sci.physics Rich Grise <rich(a)example.net> wrote: > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 17:35:03 +0000, jimp wrote: > > In sci.physics Rich Grise <rich(a)example.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 03:55:02 +0000, jimp wrote: > > > >> > Do you understand the difference between combustion and a chemical > >> > reaction? > > > >> Then, please educate us. What, exactly, is the difference between > >> "combustion" and "a chemical reaction"? > > > > In the common vernacular, combustion occurs when you light a candle and > > a chemical reaction occurs when you toss a chunk of sodium in water. > > > > Or, in other words, things don't burn until the fuel is gas and the > > fuel/oxygen mix is brought to the ignition temperature, again in the > > common vernacular. > Careful with that "common vernacular" stuff - Engineers probably don't > like it very much. > Thanks! > Rich Well, I'm an engineer and I like it, especially with a non-differentiated audience. If the common vernacular fails, use equations. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.
From: John Larkin on 4 Oct 2007 16:48
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:17:08 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Oct 4, 8:43 am, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 08:05:18 -0700,BradGuth<bradg...(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Oct 3, 5:31 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> >> >wrote: >> >> BradGuthwrote: >> >> > John Larkin wrote: >> >> > >Willie.Moo...(a)gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> > > >THE ANSWER - LOW COST HYDROGEN FROM SUNLIGHT >> >> >> > > >One simple solution I have is to reduce the cost of photovoltaics to >> >> > > >less than 7 cents a peak watt - and use that DC power to produce >> >> > > >hydrogen from DI water at very los cost. Then store that hydrogen in >> >> > > >empty oil wells - about 100 day supply is needed for a stable national >> >> > > >hydrogen supply system.. >> >> >> > > 7 cents a watt would be wonderful, but it's about 30:1 away from what >> >> > > anybody is doing, even at the research level. And if we had such >> >> > > power, the first rational use is to dump it into the grid, not convert >> >> > > it to hydrogen at absurd net efficiency. >> >> >> > > Low cost solar would be great, but there's no particular link to >> >> > > hydrogen. Too many "advanced" energy concepts are predicated on >> >> > > ultra-cheap solar power, cheap enough to waste prodigiously. That >> >> > > ain't gonna happen. >> >> >> > And your plan of action for the wasting of such spare/surplus clean >> >> > energy is ???? >> >> >> There is no 'spare energy' nor is there ever likely to be. Simple economics will >> >> prevent it. >> >> >You mean that Yids and others of your kind will prevent it. Trust me, >> >we understand. >> >> It's remarkable how little you do understand. >> >> It's easy to imagine things when you are unencumbered by numbers. >> >> And what's this "Yid" obsession about? That makes as little sense as >> the rest of your ravings. > >You're not even from Earth, so how would you know or care otherwise? > >Your black hole of insurmountable naysayism is so in denial that it's >fully understandable as to why you'd knowingly work on behalf of the >likes of big energy, or GW Bush or for that matter Hitler. >- Brad Guth - I was invited to consult with a middle eastern power, to teach them picosecond electronics for their nuclear weapons program, for big bucks. And I had the opportunity to sell to a major cigarette manufacturer. Turned them both down. And I sold several thousand end-use load survey meters used to analyze power consumption and temperature data in homes and commercial buildings. We're engineers here; we do things. John |