The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: BradGuth on 22 Oct 2007 09:40 On Oct 8, 5:21 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > BradGuth wrote: > > > On Oct 8, 12:24 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> > > wrote: > > > BradGuth wrote: > > > > > Why do you and/or why would Warren Buffett hate the truth and > > > > otherwise have such disdain against our badly failing environment? > > > > Why do you continue to post your lies and hatred? > > > Now that's our warm and fuzzy semitic Michael A. Terrell, isn't it. > > Another thing you have no clue about, but it doesn't stop you from > posting your usual ignorant drivel. The basic laws of physics and the best available science is drivel? (do tell) For accommodating each one of us American/westernised village idiots, and without my even getting this rant into various personal transportation, communications, lighting or HVAC considerations, it unavoidably takes a lot of fossil crude oil, coal, natural gas and/or even yellowcake derived energy in order to commercially produce, transport, process, extra fancy package, further transport and eventually distribute the vast bulk of our food, the majority of which (50+% upon average) gets tossed out and/or disposed of for more than one good or bad reason or another. It's often worse off on the sorts of commercial/consumer inert goods that too often get hardly utilized at all before they get discarded or stored at something that's costing us more energy than they're worth, along with many of such inert items being energy consumers to boot. Recycling is for the most part a pathetic joke, as having been costing us more energy and subsequently polluting in more ways than most of us can count, with only a few exceptions to that rule that which simply does not make up for the overall negative energy and subsequent pollution aspects of our all- inclusive recycling package. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrel_of_oil_equivalent 1 barrel = 5.8e6 BTU @59°F equals 6.118e9 J, or about 1.7 MW.h Figure at best roughly 50% efficiency, as that's worth 850 kw.h If it were all going into your Hummer, figure 12.5% or 213 kw.h Some of the folks I've worked for and of many others I know of couldn't hardly survive on less than an equivalent barrel worth of crude oil energy per hour. Go figure how their life style needs 168 fold as much energy as myself. In other words, we can use all the spare hydro-electric, solar, wind, tidal and geothermal energy we can get, plus He3 fusion if possible. > Willie.Moo/(aka William Mook) > Well I'm working on some synfuel plants right now. Once that is > underway I will do some acquisitions in the US. I am not seeking > outside investors or participation. Synfuels such as h2o2 have been a done deal for better than a century (H2O2 was discovered in 1818), that is unless there's no ongoing incentive or honest considerations for the new and improved ICE of dual fuel injected and of a one-cycle format that'll safely utilize such an energy rich fluid as h2o2, along with a little conventional fossil fuel or whatever other synfuel that'll create the absolute minimum CO2 and zilch or zero NOx. All other conventional ICEs that'll burn whatever fuel along with our mostly N2 atmosphere are going to get relatively poor empg, as well as keep polluting at maximum levels of CO2 and NOx, plus unavoidably contributing many other nasty byproducts in their birth-to-grave (aka all inclusive) energy cycle. Even utilizing H2+atmosphere is not going to entirely save our badly failing environment that's going to be continually getting hotter because of what the basic laws of physics has to do with any planet having recently obtained such a horrific mascon of a nearby moon, that's orbiting its mostly fluid planet just fast enough as to keeping our inner planetology vary much alive and geothermally kicking. It seems the usenet anti-think-tank gauntlet of naysayism has been well enough polished to see your self, and this faith-based cultism that's in charge of keeping those mostly fossil fuels and yellowcake as spendy as possible, is thereby in charge of keeping our environment as polluted and every bit as lethal as possible, especially as we merge ourselves into WWIII on behalf of surviving their mostly semitic global energy domination quest. Of one fairly recent contribution on behalf of the makings and utilizing of h2o2: "Hydrogen Peroxide and Sugar" http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/peroxide.html Besides direct energy applied usage, there's lots of other nifty h2o2 applications that shouldn't go unnoticed, or under appreciated: http://www.h2o2.com/intro/faq.html In spite of what's being orchestrated and said about myself, I'm not the actual messenger from hell that's suggesting plain old H2 or LH2 should ever be excluded, as obviously H2, LH2 and LOx are each good to go as is, and as such should also be produced via clean energy along with the energy storage likes of aluminum and magnesium as derived from whatever's the cache of clean and renewable energy that's in surplus. However, for the average end-user of liquid fuels for our Hummers, SUVs and massive trucks that are typically 10X more macho/ overkill than necessary, is exactly where the usage of h2o2+fossil or h2o2+synfuel becomes one of our most viable alternatives, especially once all those birth-to-grave energy cards are turned face up. The H2 fuel cell form of energy for personal and light commercial transportation seems doable, although fairly complex, spendy as all get out and still somewhat birth-to-grave polluting once those pesky all-inclusive factors are taken fully into account. This doesn't in any way interpret as meaning that we should not have such H2 fuel cell powered cars, light SUV/trucks and even pocket utility grid modules of such clean energy derived via H2 and atmosphere, because we most certainly should. William Mook's planned use of H2 for extracting fossil oil is obviously another direct application that's nothing but a solid win-win for everyone's gipper, including mother nature's gipper. Of what we badly need is the likes of Mook's greatly improved terrestrial base of solar derived energy (though also including the likes of Buffett's wind, tidal and geothermal alternatives shouldn't be excluded or much less banished) that'll fit rather nicely into our future needs without their imposing too much land or ocean usage that's otherwise needed as is. Mook's SBLs are clearly doable, especially if those were given a moon tethered platform that'll reach those SBLs safely to with 2r of mother Earth, as to safely operate from. The problem seems that folks much like yourself do not actually understand all that much of anything about our moon's L1, or much less of what such tethered configurations have to offer. Wouldn't you folks like to see this one in a fully interactive 3D simulation, such as produced by yet another one of those spendy Google/NOVA animation infomercial productions? (I most certainly would) - Brad Guth -
From: John Larkin on 22 Oct 2007 10:06 On 22 Oct 2007 01:56:02 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Sounds like you have issues about money. Its impossible to make money >> and not create value. That's what it means to make money. If you end >> up with a lot of money in your pocket and have not created value, then >> you are not a business person, you are a crook. That's the genius of >> free-markets. All the exchanges are voluntary, so wealth is created >> necessarily. > >Our John Larken has issues with damn near everything under that sun >which orbits is semitic flat Earth, and then some. >- Brad Guth - There *are* now some effective treatments for obcessive-compulsive disorder, you know. John
From: BradGuth on 22 Oct 2007 16:32 On Oct 22, 7:06 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On 22 Oct 2007 01:56:02 -0700, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Sounds like you have issues about money. Its impossible to make money > >> and not create value. That's what it means to make money. If you end > >> up with a lot of money in your pocket and have not created value, then > >> you are not a business person, you are a crook. That's the genius of > >> free-markets. All the exchanges are voluntary, so wealth is created > >> necessarily. > > >Our John Larken has issues with damn near everything under that sun > >which orbits is semitic flat Earth, and then some. > >- Brad Guth - > > There *are* now some effective treatments for obcessive-compulsive > disorder, you know. And you're telling us this because of your personal first-hand LLPOF or naysayism expertise that required such treatments? - Brad Guth -
From: John Larkin on 22 Oct 2007 16:44 On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:32:01 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Oct 22, 7:06 am, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On 22 Oct 2007 01:56:02 -0700, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Sounds like you have issues about money. Its impossible to make money >> >> and not create value. That's what it means to make money. If you end >> >> up with a lot of money in your pocket and have not created value, then >> >> you are not a business person, you are a crook. That's the genius of >> >> free-markets. All the exchanges are voluntary, so wealth is created >> >> necessarily. >> >> >Our John Larken has issues with damn near everything under that sun >> >which orbits is semitic flat Earth, and then some. >> >- Brad Guth - >> >> There *are* now some effective treatments for obcessive-compulsive >> disorder, you know. > >And you're telling us this because of your personal first-hand LLPOF >or naysayism expertise that required such treatments? >- Brad Guth - No, I'm telling you that you have unreasonable compulsions about Judiasm and hydrogen peroxide. Maybe you should date a yiddish blonde for a while and get over it. John
From: Michael A. Terrell on 22 Oct 2007 21:10
John Larkin wrote: > > There *are* now some effective treatments for obcessive-compulsive > disorder, you know. > > John Smith & Wesson is quite effective. He should ask his doctor for a prescription. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |